A 


OXFORD  MANUALS 


HS  STORY 


\J"  T?  ¥   ?  "5.  '* 


This  book  is  DUE 


stamped  below 


DEC  3      W23 


Now  in  Course  of  Publication. 

THE    OXFORD    MANUALS 

OF   ENGLISH    HISTORY. 

EDITED  BY  C.  W.  C.  OMAN,  M.A.,  F.S.A. 

Fellow  of  All  Souls  College.  Oxford. 


The  series  will  consist  of  six  volumes,  bound  in  neat  cloth,  u' 
Maps,  Genealogies,  and  Index,  price  50  cents  net,  each. 


I.  The  Making  of  the  English  Nation;  55  B.C.-IIJS  A.D. 
By  C.  G.  ROBERTSON,  B.A.,  Fellow  of  All  Souls,  Modern 
History  Lecturer,  Exeter  College.  (Ready.) 

II.  King  and  Baronage;  A.D.  1135-1328.  By  VV.  H.  HUTTON, 
B.D.,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  St.  John's  College.  (Ready.) 

III.  The  Hundred  Years'  War;  A.D.  1328-1485.    By  C.  \V.  C. 

OMAN,  M.A.,  Editor  of  the  series. 

IV.  England    and    the    Reformation;    A.D.  1485-1603.      By 

G.  W.  POWERS,  M.A.,  Late  Scholar  of  New  College. 

V.  King  and  Parliament;  A.D.  1603-1714.     By  G.  H.  WAKE- 

LING,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  Brasenose  College.     (Ready.) 

VI.  The  Making  of  the  British  Empire;  A.D.  1714-1832. 
By  A.  HASSALL,  M.A.,  Senior  Student  and  Tutor  of  Christ 
Church.  

NEW  YORK  :  CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


©Ije  ®*forb  manuals  of  (Englisl) 

Edited  by  C.  W.  C.  OMAN,  M.A.,  F.S.A 


KING  AND  PARLIAMENT 

(A.D.     1603—1714) 


G.   H.  WAKELING,  M.A. 

FELLOW  OF  BRASENOSE  COLLEGE,  OXFORD 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES     SCRIBNER'S     SONS 
1896 

1900 


MJG    - 


STATE  NORMAL  SCHOOL,  DA 

LtOS  A^GHJUES,  C All. 

!2 


GENERAL   PREFACE. 


There  are  so  many  School  Histories  of  England  al- 
ready in  existence,  that  it  may  perhaps  seem  presump- 
tuous on  the  part  of  the  authors  of  this  series  to  add 
six  volumes  more  to  the  number.  But  they  have  their 
defence  :  the  "  Oxford  Manuals  of  English  History  " 
are  intended  to  serve  a  particular'  purpose.  There 
are  several  good  general  histories  already  in  use,  and 
there  are  a  considerable  number  of  scattered  '  epochs' 
or  '  periods  '.  But  there  seems  still  to  be  room  for  a 
set  of  books  which  shall  combine  the  virtues  of  both 
these  classes.  Schools  often  wish  to  take  up  only  a 
certain  portion  of  the  history  of  England,  and  find 
one  of  the  large  general  histories  too  bulky  for  their 
use.  On  the  other  hand,  if  they  employ  one  of  the 
isolated  'epochs'  to  which  allusion  has  been  made, 
they  find  in  most  cases  that  there  is  no  succeeding 
work  on  the  same  scale  and  lines  from  which  the 
scholar  can  continue  his  study  and  pass  on  to  the 
next  period,  without  a  break  in  the  continuity  of  his 
knowledge. 

The  object  of  the  present  series  is  to  provide  a  set 
of  historical  manuals  of  a  convenient  size,  and  at  a 
very  moderate  price.  Each  part  is  complete  in  itself, 
but  as  the  volumes  will  be  carefully  fitted  on  to  each 
other,  so  that  the  whole  form  together  a  single  con- 
tinuous history  of  England,  it  will  be  possible  to  use 
any  two  or  more  of  them  in  successive  terms  or  years 
at  the  option  of  the  instructor.  They  are  kept  care- 


fully  to  the  same  scale,  and  the  editor  has  done  his 
best  to  put  before  the  various  authors  the  necessity 
of  a  uniform  method  of  treatment. 

The  volumes  presuppose  a  desire  in  the  scholar 
to  know  something  of  the  social  and  constitutional 
history  of  England,  as  well  as  of  those  purely  polit- 
ical events  which  were  of  old  the  sole  staple  of  the 
average  school  history.  The  scale  of  the  series  does 
not  permit  the  authors  to  enter  into  minute  points 
of  detail.  There  is  no  space  in  a  volume  of  130  pages 
for  a  discussion  of  the  locality  of  Brunanburgh  or  of 
the  authorship  of  Junius.  But  due  allowance  being 
made  for  historical  perspective,  it  is  hoped  that  every 
event  or  movement  of  real  importance  will  meet  the 
reader's  eye. 

All  the  volumes  are  written  by  resident  members  of 
the  University  of  Oxford,  actively  engaged  in  teaching 
in  the  Final  School  of  Modern  History,  and  the  au- 
thors trust  that  their  experience  in  working  together, 
and  their  knowledge  of  the  methods  of  instruction  in 
in  it,  may  be  made  useful  to  a  larger  public  by  means 
of  this  series  of  manuals. 


(A.D.   I603  — 


CHAPTER    I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  Middle  Ages  had  ended  in  England  amid  the 
storm  and  stress  of  the  Wars  of  the  Roses.  Wearied  out 
by  thirty  years  of  bloodshed  on  the  battlefield  The  Tudor 
and  the  scaffold,  the  English  nation  threw  government, 
itself  at  the  feet  of  Henry  VII.,  and  craved  of  him  nought 
but  "strong  governance"  and  the  end  of  anarchy.  It 
was  on  these  terms  that  he  and  his  progeny  ruled  Eng- 
land. But  jhe_Tudors_hadL_a__shrewd  perception  of  the 
truth  that  Englishmen  are  more  easily  led  than  driven. 
They  were ^tyrannical  to  many  individuals  who  resisted 
their  will  in  things  secular  or  religious,  but  to  the  majority 
they  represented  that  majesty  and  security  which  we  now 
describe  as  the  J^State ".  For,  while  they  maintained 
strict  la\v~and  order  in  the  land,  as  is  the  first  duty  of 
every  government,  they  studiously  avoided  collisions  with 
the  prejudices  and  feelings  of  the  nation. 

The  result  was  that  during  the  sixteenth  century  Eng- 
lishmen developed  a  new  spirit.  It  was  not  quite  a  spirit 
of  liberty.  We  are  accustomed  nowadays  to  Leci  to  a  na- 
a  freedom  in  our  actions  and  opinions  which  tionai  spirit, 
was  quite  unknown  thert.  If  a  man  spoke  or  wrote  or 
even  thought  differently  from  his  fellows  in  Tudor  times, 
he  was  suspected  of  disloyalty.  There  had  been  so  much 
anarchy  and  division  during  the  civil  wars  of  the  previous 
century,  that  an  absence  of  disagreement  was  felt  to  be 
the  all-important  thing. 

The  king  and  his  government  must  be  obeyed  without 


2  THE    ENGLISH    REFORMATION. 

Criticism.  Religion  was  not,  as  now,  a  matter  for  each 
man  to  choose  for  himself  without  interference.  The 
government  could  not  afford  to  let  men  obey  their  own 
consciences.  A  Roman  Catholic  was  an  enemy  of  the 
nation,  because  he  believed  in  the  pope's  authority  rather 
than  in  the  king's.  A  Puritan  was  suspected  ofCd^sloyafiy 
because  he  placed  his  own  ideas  before  the  law  of  the 
land.  No  one  could  be  loyal  both  to  pope  and  king: 
many  had  to  choose  between  law  and  conscience.  The 
slightest  criticism  of  any  matter  in  church  or  state  was 
considered  the  forerunner  of  rebellion.  If  the  Tudors 
gave  England  peace  and  order,  they  expected  in  return 
unquestioning  obedience.  The  nation  was  to  be  one  in 
thought  and  belief,  for  only  so  could  it  be  one  in  action. 

It  was  thus  that  Englishmen  •  learnt  to  feel  that  they 
were  one,  and  the  sixteenth  century  gave  us  a  national 
spirit.  It  was  shown  Th  many  ways.  Men  like  Raleigh 
felt  sure  that  Nature  intended  Englishmen  to  fight  Span- 
iards. Men  like  Richard  Grenville  expressed  their  joy 
that  they  "never  turned  their  backs  on  Don  or  Devil 
yet".  Shakspere  transplanted  into  the  tale  of  the  Lan- 
castrian reigns  a  fire  and  a  patriotism  which  really  be- 
longed to  his  own  day. 

But  the  real  source  of  this  spirit  was  the  change  in 
religion.  The  Reformation  had  a  profound  effect  upon 
The  double  England  as  a  nation,  and  upon  the  separate 
effect  of  the  individuals  who  composed  it.  It  taught  Eng- 
Reformation.  }ishmen  to  believe  in  their  independence  and 
freedom  from  the  interference  of  the  "  Bishop  of  Rome". 
This  was  at  the  bottom  of  the  great  national  feeling  of 
which  we  have  spoken.  But  men  also  learnt  that  since 
they  are  responsible  to  God  for  their  own  acts  and  words, 
they  must  learn  to  think  for  themselves.  This  was  an 
entirely  different  feeling.  It  made  each  man  believe  in 
himself.  It  may  be  called  the  "personal"  spirit.  Now 
the  Tudors  wished  to  have  the  national  spirit  without  this 
personal  one.  The  first  would  help  to  secure  reverence 
for  their  government,  for  men  could  see  in  the  monarch 
the  embodiment  of  that  free  orderly  nation  which  was  for 


TWO    RESULTS    OF    THE    REFORMATION.  3 

the  future  to  depend  upon  itself.  Eut_the  second  was 
considered  dangerous.  It  might  lead  men  to  question 
the  sovereign's  right  to  decide  religion,  as  it  had  led  them 
to  question  the  pope's  right. 

Now  this  is  exactly  what  happened.  This  personal 
spirit  led  men  jnto  a  new  religious  belief.  JTVhen  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  Church  , 

....  /    T,..  .  ,       Puritanism. 

of  England,  as  established  by  law  in  Elizabeth  s 
day,  failed  to  satisfy  some  earnest  thinkers,  they  adopted 
the_extreme  opinions  of  the  continental  Protestants.  This 
new  religious  force  was  called  in  derision  Puritanism. 
The  men  who  held  it  wished  to  purify  the  church  of  all 
that  reminded  them  of  a  hated  Popish  past — of  bishops, 
of  ceremonies  and  ritual,  even  of  sacraments.  Elizabeth, 
while  relaxing  wherever,  possible  the  bonds  of  discipline, 
yet  refused  to  allow  to  individual  consciences  any  depar- 
ture from  the  church  system  she  had  established,  either 
in  the  direction  of  Roman  Catholicism  or  of  the  advanced 
Protestantism  of  the  Continent.  So  the  Puritans  were 
punished  for  not  conforming  to  the  national  church,  no 
less  than  were  the  Roman  Catholics.  Some  obeyed  and 
accepted  the  Prayer-book  and  Episcopacy;  others  shook 
the  dust  of  England  from  their  feet  and  wrent  abroad. 
Thus  there  were  two  new  spirits  or  forces  in  the  land 
which  must  some  day  become  antagonistic  to  each  other 
— the  national  ^nd  ,thSiipfitSQiQ<^£P*tU«i  The  Tudor  govern^, 
ment  had  set  itself  to  use  the  first  and  curb  the  second. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century,  therefore, 
England  needed  a  great  man,  and  there  was  a  great  work 
for  him  to  do.  When  a  nation  becomes  strong  Political 
and  united  the  time  for  absolute  government  danger  of  the 
is  past.  A  monarch  may  act  for  a  people  time' 
when  they  are  disunited,  and  discipline  them  when  they 
quanvl,  but  he  must  act  with  them  when  they  have 
learned  the  lesson  of  unity.  They  will  then  require  some 
share  in  their  own  government,  some  right  to  advise  or 
choose.  They  will  refuse  to  be  told  what  they  are  to  do 
and  believe,  as  if  they  were  still  unable  to  act  and  think 
for  themselves.  It  is  always  a  slowr  movement  from  the 


4  A    PROBLEM    FOR    THE    STEWARTS. 

one  form  of  government  to  the  other,  and  at  the  crisis 
it  needs  a  man  who  possesses  the  nation's  confidence 
to  lead  it  steadily  along  the  path  of  toleration  and  self- 
government.  Such  a  leader  must  believe  in  the  nation 
no  less  than  in  himself. 

The  crisis  had  now  arrived,  and  unfortunately  for  Eng- 
land the  Stewart  kings,  who  now  sat  upon  the  throne  of 
The  Stewarts  tne  Tudors,  were  quite  unfitted  for  the  task, 
fail  to  meet  it.  They  believed  in  themselves  and  not  in  the 
nation.  They  thought  they  had  a  personal  mission  to 
govern,  and  consequently  treated  opposition  and  criticism 
as  impudence  or  ignorance.  No  doubt  they  had  a  good 
deal  of  both  to  encounter;  but  the  new  rulers  were  unable 
to  discern  that,  underneath  the  opposition  and  prejudices, 
there  lay  that  spirit  which  has  been  the  making  of  all 
great  nations.  James  I.  and  Charles  I.  wished  to  work 
on  Tudor  principles,  and  failed  to  understand  that  they 
had  to  deal  with  a  people  which  had  already  spent  a 
sufficient  number  of  years  in  the  nursery.  Nor  were  these 
kings  prepared  to  work  with  the  nation  and  take  it  as  it 
was.  They  believed  they  possessed  a  "  divine  hereditary 
right",  a  right  endorsed  by  their  own  wisdom  and  abilities, 
sanctioned  by  the  personal  power  allowed  to  past  kings, 
and  upheld  by  their  family  tree.  They  did  not  compre- 
hend that  the  sovereign  power,  which  all  efficient  govern- 
ments must  possess,  will  only  be  respected  by  those  who 
approve  its  work  and  can  understand  its  methods.  _§o 
they  drew  a  line  between  themselves  and  the  nation,  and 
thus  ^destroyed  that  mutual  understanding  which  had 
supported  the  Tudor  government.  While  the  tyrant 
Henry  VIII.  had  often  taken  his  parliaments  into  his 
confidence,  King  James  or  King  Charles  were  always 
careful  to  remind  the  Two  Houses  that  they  and  their 
sovereign  could  never  treat  as  equals.  Thus  the  union 
of  king  and  people  which  the  Tudors  had  fostered  the 
Stewarts  neglected. 

But  the  nation  had  learned  the  lesson  and  believed  in 
it.  When  the  good-natured  laziness  of  James  I.  and  the 
conceit  of  his  son  Charles  allowed  the  national  feeling  to 


SOVEREIGNTY   THE   QUESTION   OF   THE   CENTURY.          5 

be  wounded  by  arrogant  Spanish  ambassadors  and  sub- 
servient royal  chaplains,  resistance  was  aroused  at  once. 
In  contemning  the  national  spirit  these  kings  aroused 
the  personal  one— the  Puritan  one.     Roman  En  Ush 
Catholicism  was  still  to  most  Englishmen  the  Puritan  spirit^ 
Evil  One  in  disguise,  and  when  the  Stewarts  nses 
refused  to  see  it  in  that  light,  yet  condescended  to  give' 
no  reasons  for  toleration,  Puritan  politicians  were  exas- 
perated, while  Puritan  divines  and  pamphleteers  wrote 
enthusiastic  and  wearisome  tracts  to  prove  that  England 
was  pledged  to  the  continental  form  of  Protestantism. 
High-Church  clergymen  were  rewarded  by  royal  favour 
for  preaching  and  writing  that  the  king  was  .above  the 
law,  and  could  be  neither  criticised  nor  resisted.     And 
the  Puritans  answered  by  combining  their  resistance  to 
ecclesiastical  "innovations"  with  a  passionate  claim  for 
the  supremacy  of  Parliament  over  the  royal  power.    Thus 
the  religious  and  the  political  opposition  were  merged  in 
one. 

The  struggle  that  ensued  became  a  battle  for  "sove- 
reignty ",  that  is  for  the  supreme  and  final  power  in  the 
state.       Both   parties   claimed   divine   sane-   sovereignty 
tion  for  their  religious  programme,  and  each   at  stake  ^ 

wished  the  state  to  enforce  it.  The  king  and  a  majority  '*/ 
ofjhe  churchmen  combined  to  resist  the  claims  of  the 
Parliament  and  the  Puritans.  The  Parliament  and  the 
Puritans  combined  to  dispute  the  king's  right  to  lay  down 
the  law  in  church  and  state.  Thus  the  opposition,  though^X 
it  claimed  to  be  national,  was  really  inspired  by  'that  per- 
sonal spirit  which  claimed  the  right  to  think  for  itself  in 
matters  political  as  well  as  in  matters  religious.  Men 
began  to  teach  that  the  real  duty  of  a  government  was  to 
get  at  the  mind  of  the  nation  and  carry  out  its  will,  rather 
than  to  dictate  what  was  to  be  done  and  believed. 

Now,  the  question  of  sovereignty  was  one  on  which  it 
was  useless  to  appeal  to  former  practice;  for   The 
there  were  enough  precedents  in  church  and   respective 
state  to  justify  both  parties.     Each  accused   ar*uments 
the  other  of  "innovation",   or  departure   from   custom, 


6  WHAT    ENGLAND   HAD   TO    LEARN. 

and  each  claimed  the  conservative  position  so  dear  to  / 
Englishmen.  The  king  said  that  the  claims  of  Parliament/ 
to  a  share  in  the  sovereign  power  were  unheard  of,  as 
indeed  they  were,  if  Tudor  times  were  the  test.  Arch 
bishop  Laud  thought  the  Puritan  idea  of  a  strict  obser- 
vance of  the  Sabbath  was  unheard  of,  which,  until  very 
recent  years,  it  certainly  was.  On  the  other  hand,  Par- 
liament considered  that  the  king's  claim  to  be  above  the 
law  was  unheard  of,  and  on  medieval  precedents  this  too 
was  true.  The  Puritans  urged  that  the  ceremonies  they 
were  told  to  observe  were  "  innovations  ",  and  for  many 
years  this  also  was  true. 

The  solution  of  the  religious  dispute  was  a  gradual 
extension  of  freedom  in  thought  and  action,  but  for  this    / 
The  real       neither  party  was  as  yet  prepared.    The  solu-</ 
solution  in    tion  of  the  political  dispute  was  a  gradual 
ire'    change  of  the  form  of  government  from  one 
in  which  the  king  commanded  and  the  nation  chafed,  into 
one  in  which  the  government  was  responsible  to  Parlia- 
ment, while  Parliament  was  responsible  to  the  electors. 
The  struggle  wore  on  till  it  ended  in  war,  which  did  not 
bring  a  settlement  of  the  question.     Not  till  the  end  of 
the  century  was  toleration  begun  in  practice,  and  the  law 
finally  placed  above  the  king.     But  by  the  time  of  Wil- 
liam III.,  the  "Cabinet"  responsible  to  Parliament,  which 
carries  on  a  national  government  in  accordance  with  na- 
tional wishes,  was  not  far  distant. 

When  England  had  learnt  that  the  majority  of  men  in 
a  civilized  nation  cannot  be  permanently  excluded  from 
a  share  in  its  government,  the  goal,  to  which  the  struggles 
of  the  seventeenth  century  had  been  pointed,  was  reached. 
It  is  our  own  fault  to-day  if  we  cannot  trust  each  other  in 
religious  questions,  and  trust  our  elected  government  in 
national  questions. 


CHARACTER    OF    JAMES.  7 

CHAPTER   II. 

THE    REIGN    OF   JAMES    I.:    1603-1625. 

James  Stewart,  the'  successor  of  Elizabeth  on  the 
English  throne,  was  the  son  of  the  famous  Mary  "Queen 
of  Scots ".  He  had  been  king  in  Scotland  _ 

,,  .....  .  .  °  .  The  new  king.  \i 

almost  from  his  birth:  on  his  accession  to 
the  crown  of  the  triple  kingdom,  henceforth  called  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland,  he  was  thirty-seven  years  old.  His 
position  in  Scotland  had  been  one  of  great  difficulty, 
largely  owing  to  the  Presbyterian  clergy,  whose  constant 
officious  interference  with  him  had  grafted  in  his  mind  a 
firm  belief  in  the  merits  of  an  Episcopal  Church  depen- 
dent upon  the  crown. 

James  was  acute  in  his  own  limited  way,  learned,  and 
good-humoured;  but  his  character  was  fatally  marred  by 
conceit,  obstinacy,  and  indecision.  His  uncouth  man- 
ners and  ungainly  person  rendered  absurd  his  claim  to 
be  considered  a  supernaturally-gifted  king— the  "  British 
Solomon"  as  he  loved  to  be  called.  An  honest  belief  in 
his  own  abilities  and  good  intentions  is  always  a  source 
of  weakness  to  a  man  who  has  little  power  of  work  and  , 
less  appreciation  of  difficulties.  James  was,  and  re-i/ 
mained,  without  a  policy,  though  a  policy  was  impera- 
tively necessary  for  one  who  had  to  deal  with  the  two, 
,urreat  questions  which  Elizabeth  had  left  unsolved,  the^ 
question  of  Sovereignty  of  the  state,  and  the  question  of 
toleration  in  the  Church. 

The  first  ten  years  of  this  reign  are  marked  by  constant 
little  failures  which  are  hardly  retrieved  by  the  absence  of    / 
any  great  mistakes.     The  king  failed  to  keep  character  of 
in   touch   with   his   first   Parliament,   which  the  first  period.  \j 
lasted  from  1604  to  1610,  as  completely  as  he  showed 
himself  unable  to  solve  the  increasing  religious  difficulties 
caused  by  the  rise  of  the  Puritans.     In  Ireland  and  Scot- 
land attempts  at  a  statesmanlike  policy  were  thwarted  by 
the  royal  obstinacy;  but  in  foreign  matters,  where  in  after 


8  A   BAD    BEGINNING. 

days  James  was  apt  to  flounder  more  than  in  domestic, 
he  was  kept  from  serious  harm  by  the  wisdom  of  his  first 
minister,  Robert  Cecil,  Earl  of  Salisbury. 

The  attitude  of  the  Parliament  toward  the  king  was 
from  the  beginning  ominous  of  troubles  to  come.  The 
The  feeling  of  Commons  stated  in  the  "  Form  of  Apology "/ 
Parliament.  (1604)  that  their  privileges  were  their  "rightV, 
not  derived,  as  James  thought,  from  the  royal  "grace". 
This  strong  language  was  occasioned  by  his  attack  upon 
the  right  of  the  Lower  House  to  decide  disputed  elec- 
tions. Nor  did  the  leaders  spare  hints  that  the  dangers 
of  Elizabeth's  reign  had  kept  the  Parliamentary  demands 
more  moderate  than  they  were  likely  to  be  in  future. 
The  king  merely  replied  that  they  should  use  their  liberty 
with  more  modesty. 

The  complete  union  of  England  with  Scotland  was  one 
of  James's  dearest  projects ;  but  the  English  were  jealous 
The  Scottish  of  Scots,  and  the  matter  was  finally  dropped 
Union.  because  there  was  no  agreement  as  to  how  it 

should  be  managed.  Parliament  wished  to  have  a  share 
in  effecting  it  by  legally  naturalizing  Scotchmen.  This, 
the  king  thought,  was  accomplished  by  the  mere  fact  of 
his  accession.  An  appeal  to  the  judges  produced  the 
decision  that  a  child  born  in  Scotland  since  1603  was  not 
an  alien;  and  further  than  this  the  king,  who  had  the 
best  intentions  in  the  matter,  was  unable  to  go. 

In  religion,  which  was  likely  to  prove  the  greatest  crux 
of  all,  there  were  three  parties :  those  orthodox  Anglicans, 
The  religious  who  conformed  to  the  Prayer-book  and  the 
difficulty.  Church  system  of  Elizabeth;  the  obstinate 
few  who  remained  true  to  Roman  Catholicism ;  and  the 
Puritans,  who  had  been  persecuted  by  Elizabeth,  but 
hoped  for  better  times  under  the  new  regime.  The 
Policy  to  Roman  Catholics  were  menaced  by  many  / 
Roman  laws  passed  in  the  late  reign,  which  made  thev 

exercise  of  their  religion  high  treason.  They 
were  also  liable  to  fines  for  not  attending  their  parish 
churches.  The  former  are  called  the  "  Penal  laws",  the 
latter  "  Recusancy"  fines.  James  did  not  share  the  bitter 


THE    GUNPOWDER    PLOT.  ^ 

feeling  which  had  prompted  these  laws,  and  would  fain 
have  put  an  end  to  all  religious  quarrels.  A  noble  aim ; 
but  not  a  practical  one  in  an  age  when  the  Popes  still 
looked  upon  England  as  probably  reclaimable  to  the  / 
dominion  of  the  Roman  see.  Parliament  spoke  the  voice  J 
of_the_jtnajority  of  Englishmen  when  it  demanded  the 
enforcement  of  these  cruel  laws.  Their  attitude  was 
strengthened  by  the  wild  attempt  of  some  fanatical 
Papists  to  sweep  away  king  and  Commons  alike  by  the 
horrible  "Gunpowder  Treason".  In  1605,  these  eager 
spirits — their  chiefs  were  Catesby,  Winter,  Fawkes,  and 
Digby — formed  the  "Gunpowder  Plot".  The  Houses  of 
Parliament  wen  to  be  blown  up  during  a  sitting,  at  which 
the  king  and  the  Prince  of  Wales  were  to  be  present,  by 
means  of  gunpowder  placed  in  the  cellars  beneath.  It 
was  discovered  through  a  letter  in  which  one  of  the  con- 
spirators endeavoured  to  hint  to  his  friend  the  danger  of 
attending  Parliament  on  November  5.  After  the  execution 
of  Guy  Fawkes  and  others,  persecution  fell  more  strin- 
gently on  the  Catholics,  for  the  nation  suspected  that  they 
had  all  been  implicated  in  the  plot,  and  wished  to  exter- 
minate the  whole  sect. 

Meantime  the  Puritans  were  far  from  satisfied.  In  the 
Millenary  Petition1  presented  to  the  king  very  shortly 
after  his  arrival  in  England  (1603), -they  had 

,       ,    c  -it.  •        The  Puritans. 

asked  for  some  alterations  in  the  ceremonies 
to  which  all  ministers  had  to  conform.  James  arranged 
a  conference  between  bishops  and  Puritan  divines  at 
Hampton  Court.  But  there  were  great  difficulties  in  the 
way  of  making  the  church  wide  enough  to  contain  these 
men,  who  wished  to  modify  the  thirty-nine  articles  and  to 
grant  all  presbyters  a  share  in  the  Episcopal  power.  The 
high  churchmen  opposed  all  such  changes.  James  him- 
self had  a  wholesome  dread  of  the  introduction  of  the 
Scottish  system.  The  only  result  of  the  conference  was 
that  some  canons  were  drawn  up  in  1604,  binding  clergy 
and  laity  still  more  strictly  to  the  Prayer-book. 

1  So  called  because  it  was  supposed  to  contain  the  signatures  of  1000  ministers. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  there  were  less  than  800. 


well  / 
:ials/ 
no? 


10  THE    KING   APPEALS   TO   THE    JUDGES. 

For  the  time  the  parliamentary  protests  against  this    . 
attitude  of  church  and  crown  were  in  vain.     But  when  / 
Two  theories   James  showed  a  disposition  to  side  strongi)*/ 
of  government.  wfth  church  against  state  in  matters  of  law, 
and  proposed  to  settle  the  vexed  question  of  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  church  courts  by  hearing  cases  himself,  he  was  led 
into  a  serious  quarrel  with  r.hittf-jnstir.p  Cpk^    The  lawyer 
plainly  told  him  that  the  rnya,]  power  was  official  rather 
than  personal,  and  that  the  Law  was  above  it.     Such  a 
doctrine  was  anything    but    agreeable   to  one  who   held 
with  "divine  hereditary  righj.". 

Taxation  was  another  point  on  which  James  was  soon 
at  issue  with  his  subjects.  The  king's  income  was  not 
Parliament  sufficient  for  the  needs  of  government  as  well 
and  taxation.  as  those  of  an  extravagant  court,  whose  officials^ 
made  money  at  the  nation's  expense.  Parliament  was 
liberal  to  a  king  with  whom  they  so  seldom  agreed,  and  / 
James,  relying  on  precedents  in  the  late  reign,  took  upon/ 
himself  to  increase  the  import  duties  without  consulting 
Parliament.  Such  "  impositions  "  had  been  made  illegal 
in  Edward  III.'s  reign,  but  the  judges  decided  in  the  case  / 
of  Bate  (1606)  that  the  king  could  increase  or  vary  such 
taxes  by  his  prerogative  or  royal  power  alone.  This  was 
the  fkst  of  a  long  series  of  cases  during  the  century  in 
which  the  king  appealed  to  the  Bench  for  a  confirmation 
of  his  rights.  James's  first  Parliament  closed  its  seven 
years'  duration  with  a  quarrel  over  another  financial  diffi- 
culty. The  "Great  Contract"  was  a  scheme  by  which 
the  crown  should  renounce  the  antiquated  feudal  pay- 
ments due  from  land  in  return  for  a  fixed  annual  sum. 
This  finally  failed,  for  the  Commons  required,  as  a  pre- 
liminary, satisfaction  about  "impositions"  and  church 
courts. 

It  was  of  little  use  for  men  like  Bacon  to  hope  that 
king  and  Parliament  would  work  together  for  reform  and 
NO  real  hope"  progress.  Each  was  in  fact  beginning  to 
of  harmony.  ciajm  for  itself  a  " discretionary  power"  to 
act  somewhat  beyond  the  existing  law.  The  Tudor  plan 
of  doing  what  was  necessary  was  losing  credit  in  the  face 

(962) 


IRISH   AND   FOREIGN   QUESTIONS.  II 

of  the  further  question  of  what  was  right;  and  it  is  certain 
that  a  man  like  James  put  a  great  strain  on  the  idea  that 
kings  govern  because  they  know  best. 

Meanwhile  Ireland  had  its  own  set  of  difficulties  and 
problems.  The  Irish  rebellion  of  1598  had  been  pitilessly 
crushed,  and  in  1604  Sir  A.  Chichester  under-  chichester's 
took  the  government  of  Ireland.  There  mle  in  Irelan'*ssj 
were  two  chief  difficulties,  land  and  religion,.  The  native 
Irish  looked  on  Protestantism  as  a  foreign  creed  forced 
on  them  against  their  will.  The  Lord  Deputy  tried  con- 
ciliatory measures,  and  hoped  to  educate  the  Irish  in  the 
change  of  faith.  But  the  Irish  Parliament  of  1613  proved 
as  intractable  as  the  English,  and  James  foolishly  recalled 
Chichester,  of  whose  moderate  policy  he  had  not  ap- 
proved. The  agrarian  difficulty,  which  Chichester  had 
proposed  to  solve  by  abolishing  the  ancient  Irish  custom 
by  which  the  whole  tribe  held  the  tribal  lands  in  common 
tenure,  and  making  the  natives  free  tenants,  led  to  a 
wholesale  eviction  of  the  latter  and  the  colonization  of 
Ulster  by  English  and  Scotch  settlers. 

On  the  Continent  the  government  had  inherited  from 
Elizabeth  a  policy  of  war  with  Spain,  but  as  Spain  was 
no  longer  dangerous  James  and  Cecil  wisely   Foreign 
made  peace  (1604).     There  was,  however,  a   Protestant        \/ 
feeling  in  England  that  something  should  be   policy.  v 

done  for  the  Netherlands,  that  is,  the  countries  we  now 
call  Belgium  and  Holland.     The  northern  or  Dutch  pro- 
vinces had  recently  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  Spain,  while 
the  southern  or  Belgian  had  by  cruel  persecutions  been      / 
kept  back  in  their  servitude.     James  was  in  fact  induced  v/ 
in  1609  to  guarantee,  on  behalf  of  the  Northern  provinces, 
a  treaty  by  which  they  obtained  a  twelve  years'  truce  from 
Philip   III.,  but   he  refused   to  be  dragged   into  a  war 
against  Spain  in  their  interest.     He  also  allied  himself  >/ 
with    Henry    IV.    of  France,   and   with   the    Protestant 
princes  in  Germany,  marrying  his  daughter  Elizabeth  to 
the  Protestant  Elector  Frederick  of  the  Palatinate.     Such 
was  the  policy  of  Cecil,  who  died   in   1612.     With  his 
death,  following  on  that  of  Henry  IV.,  and  of  James's 

(062)  B 


12  THE    ROYAL    PEACEMAKER. 

hopeful  son,  Prince  Henry,  the  chances  of  a  successful 
1  foreign  policy  came  to  an  end. 

From   1612   to  1619  James  fell   from  bad   to  worse. 

M  Finding  that  Parliament  could  not  be  moulded  to  his  will, 
Second  period  he  came  to  rely  on  favourites  who  moulded 

sj  of  the  reign.  hjm  to  theirs.  He  opened  an  intrigue  with 
Spain,  and  became  a  tool  in  the  hands  of  its  quick- 
jwitted  ambassador,  Sarmiento,  Count  of  Gondomar.  Fie 
v/adopted  Bacon's  fatal  theory  that  the  judges  should  be 
"lions  under  the  throne",  i.e.  the  king's  tools,  and  dis- 
missed the  Chief  Justice,  who  objecteolo  be  made  the 
exponent  of  this  experiment  in  natural  history.  He 
trampled  on  the  Scottish  Church,  quarrelled  with  the 
Dutch,  and  so  lost  touch  with  his  people  that  when  a 
national  question  arose  in  the  last  period  of  his  reign-  he 
was  unable  to  avoid  disaster. 

A  Scotchman  named  Robert  Carr,  upon  whom  James 
lavished  titles  and  favours,  was  now  his  chief  adviser. 

V  Carr  and  the  He  had  been  made  Viscount  Rochester,  and 
Spanish  party,  shortly  became  Earl  of  Somerset.  The  Spanish 
party  at  court,  and  the  Spanish  ambassador,  Sarmiento, 
used  this  favourite  to  further  their  policy.  The  alliance 
with  France  had  failed  after  the  three  deaths  before  men- 
tioned, and  the  efforts  of  Spain  were  now  directed  to  replace 
it  by  a  closer  friendship  with  the  court  of  Madrid.  The 
Spaniards  had  a  delusion  that  Protestantism  was  merely 
an  English  fad,  which  might  be  removed  with  patience 
and  care. 

James's  own  idea  was  expressed  in  the  words  "  beati 
padfici".  He  loved  to  dream  of  himself  as  the  peace- 
The  king's  making  arbiter  of  a  docile  Europe.  But  he 
aims.  failed  to  see  that  Spain  liked  peace  for  other 

reasons;    that  she  did  not  want    England  to  help  the 
Dutch,   and  was  only  trying  to  win  toleration  for  the 
Catholics,  fondly  dreaming  of  the  complete  conversion  of 
,    England  to  crown  her  castle  in  the  air. 

^  The  financial  needs  of  the  government  caused  a  Parlia- 
ment to  be  summoned  in  1614.  But  the  new  assembly 
refused  to  supply  the  Royal  needs  unless  it  could  obtain 


THE    FALL    OF    CHIEF-JUSTICE    COKE.  13 

some  satisfaction  about  "impositions",  which  had  been 
largely  increased  since  the  case  of  Bate.1  The  Spanish 
party  suggested  that  a  marriage  of  Prince  The "  Addie\ 
Charles,  now  heir  to  the  English  throne,  with  Parliament  "> 
the  wealthy  Infanta  Maria,  daughter  of  Philip  III.,  would 
settle  James's  debts;  and  the  king,  relying  on  the  kindly 
feelings  of  the  Spanish  ambassador,  dissolved  Parliament 
after  two  months.  Digby,  afterwards  Earl  of  Bristol,  was 
intrusted  with  negotiations  of  a  vague  character  for  the 
Spanish  match.  He  was  able  and  honest, — too  honest  to 
be  on  a  level  with  the  Spanish  diplomatists. 

The  obstinacy  and  consequent  dissolution  of  Parliamei 
soon  caused  another  return  to  arbitrary  taxation  by  royal 
mandate.  This  took  the  form  of  a  "  Benevo-  LSW  and  pre- 
lence"  or  free  gift,  but  the  gift  was  in  truth  so  rogative. 
little  free  that  a  man  named  Oliver  St.  John  was  prose- 
cuted in  the  Star  Chamber  for  refusing  to  contribute.  This 
court,  the  king's  favourite  engine,  was  extremely  powerful, 
because  exempt  from  the  ordinary  rules  of  judicial  pro- 
cedure. It  had  been  very  effectual  in  suppressing  dis- 
order in  Tudor  times,  and  was  now  composed  of  the 
members  of  the  Privy  Council,  who  were  thus  able  to 
punish  those  who  resisted  the  royal  authority.  It  was 
practically  the  ministry  sitting  as  unfettered  judge  of  its 
own  acts.  It  was  not  long  before  the  crown  gained  a 
further  ally  in  a  subservient  Bench.  Chief-justice  Coke\ 
had  an  exaggerated  opinion  of  the  importance  of  the 
lawyers,  but  his  belief  in  the  law  was  a  useful  weapon 
against  a  king  who  claimed  to  be  irresponsible.  He  dis- 
agreed with  Bacon's  idea,  and  considered  that  the  judges 
should  be  arbiters  in  the  state,  a  view  which  would  only 
suit  James  so  long  as  they  arbitrated  in  his  favour.  When,  / 
therefore,  Coke  asserted  his  duty  as  a  judge  to  act,  not  on  \/ 
the  king's  orders,  but-  as  the  law  dictated,  he  was  dismissed 
(1616).  Bacon  became  Chancellor  soon  after  this,  and 
the  Stewarts  had  little  further  trouble  from  independent 
judges. 

The  Dutch  were  driving  James  further  in  the  direction 

1  See  page  10. 


14  EXECUTION    OF    RALEIGH. 

of  a  Spanish  alliance  by  disputing  the  English  monopoly 
Fail  of  Somer-  of  whale-fishing,  and  excluding  them  from 
set.  1616.  trade  with  the  Spice  Islands  in  the  East 
Indies.  But  the  arrogance  of  Somerset  was  unbearable, 
and  his  anti-Spanish  opponents  were  already  undermining 
his  monopoly  of  the  king's  favour,  by  teaching  a  handsome, 
clever  youth  named  Villiers  to  attract  the  king's  notice. 
At  this  moment  the  Spanish  conditions  of  marriage  were 
announced,  and  as  they  included  a  suspension  of  the  Penal 
laws  and  a  Catholic  education  for  the  future  heir  to  the 
throne,  the  hopes  of  the  opposite  party  revived.  Their 
triumph  appeared  even  more  sure  after  a  scandalous  law- 
suit, in  which  Somerset  and  his  wife  were  pronounced 
guilty  of  poisoning  a  courtier  named  Overbury,  who  had 
known  some  damaging  facts  about  the  divorce  of  Lady 
Somerset  from  her  first  husband.  James,  however,  was 
Raleigh  and  not  easily  diverted  from  his  hankering  after 
the  Spaniards.  Spain.  He  feared  the  nation's  feeling  might 
develop  into  a  war-cry,  and  apparently  thought  he  could 
allay  their  prejudices  by  selling  their  laws  and  opinions. 
The  enemies  of  Spain  had  now  found  a  ready  weapon  in 
the  old  Elizabethan  sea-captain,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh.  He 
had  been  in  prison  for  twelve  years  for  supposed  complicity 
in  a  plot  against  the  king.  But  he  was  still  eager  to  sail 
to  the  Orinoco  and  discover  a  mine  of  gold  of  which  he 
had  heard  in  former  voyages.  James  allowed  him  to  go, 
though  the  Spaniards  cried  out  against  the  scheme  as  an 
infringement  of  the  unlimited  rights  which  they  claimed 
in  the  West  Indies.  Raleigh,  though  warned  not  to 
trespass  on  these  rights,  started  with  no  intention  of 
keeping  so  impossible  a  promise.  After  an  unsuccessful 
voyage,  in  which  his  men  fought  with  Spanish  settlers 
and  burnt  St.  Thome,  he  returned  to  find  the  king  pledged 
to  hand  him  over  to  Spain.  The  disgrace  was  avoided, 
but  Raleigh  was  sacrificed  to  Spanish  hatred,  and  executed 
in  1618  on  the  old  charge  of  treason,  which  had  kept  him 
so  many  years  in  the  Tower. 

The  new  favourite,  George  Villiers,  had  now  become 
the  king's  trusted  adviser  as  Duke  of  Buckingham,  but 


THE   THIRTY    YEARS'    WAR.  1 5 

did  not  at  once  throw  in  his  lot  with  the  Spanish  party. 
This,  and  the  fact  that  the  Infanta  and  her  dowry  could 
not  be  obtained  without  complete  toleration  of  the  Roman 
Catholics,  caused  a  suspension  of  the  marriage  scheme. 
But  the  king,  though  he  ceased  for  the  time  to  bargain  for 
the  sale  of  the  conscience  of  England,  showed  but  scant  re- 
spect for  that  of  Scotland.  He  called  an  Assembly  at  Perth 
(1618),  which  was  forced  to  adopt  Five  Articles,  prescrib- 
ing rites  and  ceremonies  to  which  the  Scottish  clergy  and 
people  strongly  objected.  It  is  to  be  noticed,  however, 
that  James  never  went  so  far  as  his  less  prudent  son,  and 
made  no  attempt  to  enforce  uniformity  of  worship  in  his 
two  kingdoms. 

Meanwhile  the  European  horizon  grew  dark  with  the 
great  shadow  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War.  This  struggle 
began  in  Bohemia  in  the  year  1618,  and  Third  period  v 
aroused  the  national  feeling  in  a  way  that  of  the  reign, 
made  it  more  than  ever  necessary  that  there  should  be  a 
leader  with  clear  aims  and  the  confidence  of  his  people. 
But  the  last  period  of  the  reign,  from  1618  to  1625,  pre- 
sents a  pitiable  spectacle.  A  helpless  king,  drifting  aim- 
lessly amid  a  sea  of  conflicting  interests,  without  a  policy 
which  he  dared  to  explain  to  the  nation,  was  content  to 
seek  for  guidance  from  the  bitterest  enemy  of  the  nation 
— Spain. 

The  struggles  which  had  begun  during  the  last  century 
between  Protestants  and  Catholics  in  Germany  had  been 
compromised  but  not  settled.  There  were  The  Thirty  \ /• 
German  princes  pledged  to  each  side,  and  Years'  War.  V 
each  prince  claimed  to  regulate  the  religion  of  his  subjects. 
But  latitude  and  longitude  cannot  really  determine  opinion, 
and  if  they  could,  it  would  be  hard  to  settle  what  was  to 
be  done,  when  a  ruler  held  sway  oyer  many  lands  of 
varying  opinion.  This  was  the  difficulty  which  had  now 
occurred.  The  Emperor  Matthias,  when  dealing  with  his 
Bohemian  subjects,  was  obliged  to  allow  both  religions. 
The  claims  of  Protestants  to  build  churches  on  Catholic 
church-lands  led  to  the  destruction  of  one  of  their  places 
of  worship,  and  the  Protestants  at  once  rebelled.  The  rest 


1 6  THE    KING'S    INDECISION. 

of  Germany  was  composed  of  states  interested  in  one  side 
or  the  other;  but  before  much  could  happen  the  Em- 
The  Bohemian  peror  died,  and  the  Bohemians  took  the  oppor- 
Eiection.  1619.  tunity  of  refusing  to  accept  his  successor,  the 
bigoted  Ferdinand  II.  In  August,  1619,  they  elected 
James's  son-in-law,  Frederick  of  the  Palatinate,  as  their 
king.  James  believed  in  his  family  far  more  than  in  his 
country,  and  was  anxious  to  prevent  the  loss  of  his  son- 
in-law's  domain  on  the  Rhine,  which  would  probably  follow 
should  Ferdinand  be  successful  in  Bohemia.  But  he 
believed  even  more  in  himself,  and  so  he  began  to  study 
the  question  of  Bohemian  rights  while  the  time  for  action 
slipped  away. 

James  had  two  choices.  He  might  meditate  or  he  might 
fight.  For  the  latter  alternative  he  had  a  thorough  dis- 
Mediation  or  like,  and  he  was  certainly  wise  in  not  wishing 
War?  to  embroil  England  in  continental  quarrels  for 

the  sake  of  a  man  like  Frederick.  This  prince  was  proud 
and  incapable,  and  went  to  Prague  only  to  see  his  cause 
overthrown  by  the  Imperial  forces  in  Oct.,  1620.  But  if 
James  would  mediate  he  had  a  fair  chance.  Spain,  though  • 
connected  by  her  Royal  family  and  religion  with  the  Em- 
peror Ferdinand,  was  not  at  all  eager  to  fight  for  the 
Catholic  cause;  as  she  was  shortly  expecting  a  renewal  of 
her  war  with  the  Dutch.  The  Protestant  princes  were 
not  anxious  to  see  their  religion  trampled  on,  and  the 
Palatinate  transferred  from  Frederick  to  the  Duke  of 
Bavaria,  which  was  the  Emperor's  intention.  France,  too, 
was  bound  to  be  jealous  of  Austro-Spanish  success.  Thus 
there  was  an  opportunity  both  to  defend  the  Palatinate  in 
force,  and  to  mediate  in  the  matter  of  Bohemia. 

While  James  was  studying  the  question  the  Palatinate 
was  seized.  Thus  the  clever  Gondomar  had  gained  his 
Parliament  or  object.  James  had  relied  on  the  high  opinion 
Spain?  1621.  he  always  held  of  Spanish  kindness,  and 
Buckingham  had  at  lasr  thrown  in  his  lot  with  Spain. 
When  the  affairs  of  the  nation  had  got  quite  beyond  their 
control  the  Stewarts  generally  summoned  a  Parliament, 
and  in  1621  James  pursued  this  course.  Here  was  a  good 


QUARREL  AND   DISSOLUTION.  17 

opportunity  to  put  himself  at  the  head  of  his  people.  He 
spoke  of  money  which  he  needed  to  enable  him  to  mediate 
"  sword  in  hand  ",  but,  as  he  did  not  explain  his  intentions 
further,  no  money  was  voted.  The  truth  yas.  hp  HaH.jnn. 
plans  to  explain.  Parliament  attacked  the  trade  mono- 
polies, which  were  sold  to  courtiers,  demanded  the  execu- 
tion of  the  Penal  laws  on  the  Papists,  and  begged  the  king 
to  fight  Spain  and  marry  his  son  to  a  Protestant.  While 
the  Commons  were  showing  the  intensity  of  their  feeling 
by  cruelly  punishing  a  Roman  Catholic  named  Floyd  for 
expressing  pleasure  at  the  defeat  of  Frederick,  James  and 
Buckingham  were  hoping  to  get  back  the  Palatinate  by 
the  old  delusion  of  the  Spanish  marriage.  The  king  first 
promised  Gondomar  not  to  allow  Parliament  to  offend  the 
religious  feeling  of  Spain,  and  then  promised  the  Houses 
not  to  conclude  any  treaties  which  would  be  disadvan- 
tageous to  the  religion  of  England !  When  the  Commons 
refused  to' leave  "the  matter  to  the  care  of  the  king  and  the  / 
Spanish  ambassador^they  were  told  not  to  meddle  witlW 
"  mysteries  of  state  ".  This,  with  a  further  declaration 
that  their  power  to  discuss  national  interests  was  de- 
rived from  the  royal  grace,  caused  them  to  protest  that 
their  liberties  were  their  birthright.  The  protest  was 
torn  from  the  journals  by  the  angry  monarch's  own  r~ 
hand,  and  the  third  Parliament  of  King  James  was  dis-/ 
solved. 

Meanwhile  the  war  in  Germany  went  on.  The  Protes- 
tant cause  was  in  the  hands  of  a  reckless  soldier  of  fortune 
named  Mansfield,  who  was  alienating  friends  Failure  in 
by  plundering  and  slaying  the  peasants  of  Palatinate. 
the  Rhine  districts.  The  Protestant  Union  gave  up  the 
struggle,  and  the  saving  of  the  Elector's  cause  was 
rendered  hopeless  when  Heidelberg,  his  capital,  fell  in 
September,  1622.  The  "intervention"  of  Spain,  on  which 
James  had  relied,  was  as  far  off  as  ever;  and  the  Spaniards, 
having  now  secured  their  object,  were  inclined  to  finish 
the  negotiations  by  pleading  the  impossibility  of  obtaining 
the  Pope's  assent  to  the  marriage. 

At  home  James  was  without  a  single  wise  counsellor. 


1 8  FAILURE  OF  THE  SPANISH   MATCH. 

Digby  was  in  Spain  trying  to  construct  a  policy  out  of 

Spanish   politeness   and   his   master's   fears, 
w  project.  Baconj   the  Lord   Chanceilor>  had  fallen  a 

victim  to  his  own  carelessness  in  accepting  presents  which 
can  Only  have  been  meant  as  bribes,  and  was  in  disgrace. 
Buckingham  and  the  Prince,  over  whose  weak  character 
the  quick  and  reckless  favourite  had  complete  influence, 
now  determined  to  go  to  Spain  and  arrange  the  marriage 
themselves.  James  was  induced  to  assent  to  this  absurd 
scheme;  but  his  council  preferred  to  send  an  ultimatum 
to  Spain  asking  whether  Philip  would  fight  the  emperor 
to  force  the  restitution  of  the  Palatinate.  This  brought 
a  deceptive  reply,  but  it  showed  the  Spaniards  that  their 
game  was  nearly  played  out. 

The  situation  when  the  travellers  reached  Madrid  was 
remarkable.  The  king,  Philip  IV.,  and  his  ministers,  as 
The  visit  to  well  as  the  Infanta  herself,  were  all  in  reality 
Madrid.  1623.  averse  to  the  match.  James  never  meant  to 
promise  the  repeal  of  the  Penal  laws,  and  the  Spaniards 
never  meant  to  take  less.  Charles  imagined  that  he  was 
in  love  as  soon  as  he  saw  the  Princess,  while  Buckingham 
offended  all  the  Spaniards  he  could  offend  in  the  short 
time  given  him.  The  Pope  refused  to  be  made  the  cause 
of  a  rupture  of  which  the  Spaniards  meant  him  to  bear  the 
blame,  and  Philip  IV.  found  it  impossible  to  propose  any 
terms  which  Charles  was  not  foolish  enough  to  accept. 
Even  after  bargaining  to  obtain  a  repeal  of  the  Penal  laws 
in  three  years,  the  Prince  still  failed  to  carry  off  the  prize, 
and  left  Madrid  in  a  fit  of  il!7temper. 

When  he  was  home  again  his  pride  outweighed  his 
affections,  and  he  called  for  vengeance  on  the  Spaniards. 
Parliament  of  He  was  still  pledged  to  the  marriage,  but  it 
1624.  was  now  England's  turn  to  raise  the  terms, 

and  Philip  was  asked  to  arm  against  his  family  and  his 
religion  to  secure  a  restitution  of  the  Palatinate.  The 
dilemma  was  in  fact  so  hopeless  that  another  Parliament 
was  summoned  for  February,  1624.  Buckingham  and 
Charles  were  able  to  pose  as  national  heroes,  who  had 
burst  the  chains  riveted  by  Spain  to  fetter  English  freedom. 


DEATH   OF  JAMES   I.  19 

The  treaties  were  dissolved  and  money  voted.     But  the 
chance  of  acting  with  Parliament  speedily  vanished. 

Buckingham  now  became  anxious  for  an  alliance  with 
France,  the  old  foe  of  Spain,  and  wished  to  secure  the 
hand  of  a  French  princess  for  Charles.  Par-  A  hopeiess 
liament  was  more  than  ever  determined  to  confusion  of 
keep  to  the  Penal  laws,  and  in  foreign  affairs  pohtlcs- 
to  renew  the  work  of  Elizabeth  and  smite  Spain  by  sea 
and  land.  The  King  of  England  was  thinking  only  of  the 
Palatinate,  and  was  as  willing  to  rely  on  French  charity  as 
on  Spanish,  but  hated  all  idea  of  a  religious  war.  The 
French  were  delighted  to  see  Spain  injured,  but  cared 
nothing  for  the  Palatinate,  since  they  were  only  bent  on 
recovering  the  Valtelline,  the  Alpine  valley  by  which  the 
Spaniards  had  an  access  to  Germany  from  the  Mediter- 
ranean. Nor  was  France  sufficiently  in  need  of  the  Eng- 
lish alliance  to  waive  her  claim  for  toleration  of  Roman 
Catholics  in  England. 

The  result  of  this  confusion  was  soon  apparent.  James, 
having  given  a  clear  promise  to  Parliament  not  to  repeal 
the  Penal  laws,  thought  that  he  could  still  Result  of  the 
write  a  secret  "  engagement "  with  France,  by  confusion, 
which  the  Roman  Catholics  were  promised  toleration. 
The  marauder  Mansfeld  was  hired  to  lead  English  troops 
to  recover  the  Palatinate,  but  when  they  crossed  the  sea 
they  were  left  to  die  in  hundreds  of  cold  and  hunger  on 
the  Dutch  frontiers.  The  marriage  treaty  with  France, 
however,  was  duly  signed,  and  the  French  king  was  pro- 
mised assistance  against  his  rebellious  Protestant  subjects. 
While  Buckingham,  who  still  retained  the  unmerited  con- 
fidence of  the  nation  (won  on  his  return  from  Spain),  was 
thus  unwittingly  concocting  a  series  of  national  disgraces, 
the  king  died  on  March  ayth,  1625.  He  was  only  in  his 
sixtieth  year,  but  his  unhealthy  habits  and  hard  drinking 
had  made  him  old  and  decrepit  long  before  his  time. 


20  CHARACTER    OF    CHARLES. 


CHAPTER   III. 

THE  REIGN  OF  CHARLES  I.  TO  THE  MEETING  OF  THE 
LONG  PARLIAMENT:   1625-1640. 

From  the  accession  of  the  second  Stewart  king  in  1625 
until  the  meeting  in  1640  of  the  Parliament  which  was 
Three  divi-  to  arm  na^  England  against  him,  there  are 
sions  of  three  well-marked  periods.  Till  1629  there 
is  peno  .  -g  a  constant  struggle  with  three  successive 
Parliaments  which  refused  to  finance  the  kaleidoscopic 
foreign  policy  of  the  king  and  Buckingham.  From  1629 
to  1637  the  rule  of  the  king  was  absolute.  He  summoned 
no  parliament,  he  taxed  as  he  pleased,  he  legislated  by 
proclamation,  he  bent  the  judges  to  his  will,  and  gave 
Archbishop  Laud  carte-blanche  to  mould  the  church  to 
the  extreme  High-Church  and  anti-Puritan  model;  while 
Strafford  in  Ireland  reproduced  on  a  smaller  scale  the 
same  tyrannical  form  of  government.  The  nation  seemed 
quiet,  and  all  fear  of  resistance  to  the  Stewart  methods 
appeared  to  be  at  an  end,  when  Scotland  rose  in  rebellion 
in  defence  of  its  religion.  The  three  years'  struggle  that 
ensued__completed  the  period.  In  1640  there  was  no; 
hope  for  Charles  but  in  an  English  Parliament,  and  on 
Nov.  3  the  long  struggle  began  for  the  sovereignty  of 
England. 

The  new  king  was  married  to  Henrietta  Maria,  sister 
of  Louis  XIII.  of  France,  in  June,  1625,  but  her  influ- 

charies  and  ence  was  at  ^rst  s^gnt  compared  to  that  of 
his  coun-  Buckingham.  Charles  was  a  prince  of  a 
quiet  and  sober  disposition :  hejDossessed  all 
the  private  virtues,  and  was  an  enlightened  friend  of  art 
and  letters,  but  he  had  learnt  only  too  well  his  father's 
doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  kings,  and  he  was  so  ob- 
stinate and  so  convinced  of  his  own  good  intentions  that 
he  scarcely  understood  the  necessity  of  saying  exactly 
what  he  meant  and  meaning  exactly  what  he  said.  His 
word  could  never  be  depended  upon.  "  He  was  easily  led 


THE    POLICY    OF  "THOROUGH 


into  a  sudden  action,  and  easily  "  amazed  "  when  he  was 
committed  to  it.  ~  Thus  his  policy  at  home  and  abroad 
was  marked  by  impulse  rather  than  by  thoughtfulness. 
He  disliked  intolerance,  but  used  it  when  it  suited  any 
policy  which  he  had  in  hand.  Indeed  he  seems  to  have 
thought  that  even  deception  was  a  fair  weapon  to  gain 
ends  which  he  believed  to  be  just.  Yet  he  was  a  loving 
husband  and  father,  a  hard-working  man  of  business, 
and  a  fairly  staunch  supporter  of  his  friends.  His 
greatest  fault  as  a  king  lay  in  the  fact  that  he  did  not 
in  the  least  understand  men.  He  considered  that  all 
those  who  disagreed  with  him  must  be  wicked  rather 
than  mistaken,  and  must  be  forced  to  see  things  in  the 
right  light.  The  same  fatal  flaw  was  in  his  friend  and 
adviser,  William  Laud,  whom  he  made  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  in  1633. 

Sir  Thomas  \Ventworth,  afterwards  Earl  of  Strafford, 
who,  after  a  brief  resistance  to  the  court  in  Parliament, 
joined  the  king's  party  because  he  found  himself  out  of 
his  element  among  Puritan  members,  was  a  j^hird  believer 
in  the  necessity  of  carrying  through  the  opinions  he  held, 
no  matter  what  resistance  was  offered,  a  method  which 
he  called  the  policy  of  "Thorough".  These  were  the 
three  men  who  were  soon  to  exasperate  England,  and 
bring  Scotland  and  Ireland  to  open  rebellion,  not  be- 
cause they  wished  to  harm  any  one,  but  because  they  did 
not  know  how  to  lead  men  who  refused  to  be  driven. 

Before  his  first  Parliament  met,  Charles  and  his  favourite 
were  resolved  to  fight  Spain.  But  Louis  of  France  was 
quite  unwilling  to  give  any  active  help,  smd  Parliament  * 
England,  besides  engaging  in  the  new  Spanish  of  l62s- 
war,  was  also  pledged  to  assist  the  Dutch,  pay  large 
sums  to  Mansfield,  and  subsidize  the  Danish  king,  who 
was  now  posing  as  the  champion  of  Protestantism  in 
Germany.  The  first  Parliament  showed  its  distrust  o'f  the 
king,  to  none  of  whose  confidences  it  was  admitted,  by 
refusing  to  vote  a  tax  on  imports  and  exports,  known  as 
"  tunnage  and  poundage",  which  had  for  centuries  been 
granted  to  kings  on  their  accession  as  a  matter  of  course. 


22  UNSUCCESSFUL   EXPEDITIONS. 

Their  Puritan  sentiments  were  also  outraged  by  the  en- 
couragement of  those  clergy  who  openly  taught  the  king's 
superiority  to  law,  and  maintained  extreme  high-church 
doctrines.  \In  the  end  the  leaders  began  to  single  out 
Buckingham  as  the  chief  cause  of  troubles.  This  was  an 
attempt  to  make  a  royal  minister  responsible  to  Parlia- 
ment, and  though  there  were  many  precedents  for  it,  yet 
it  was  so  opposed  to  Tudor  practice  and  Stewart  theory 
that  Charles  dissolved  Parliament  in  the  same  year.  At 
once  the  favourite  and  his  master  resolved  to  show  their 
ability  by  an  attack  on  Spain.  They  sent  out  an  expedi- 
tion, which  sailed  into  Cadiz  harbour  in  October,  1625, 
hut  it  turned  out  a  complete  and  disgraceful  failure. 

A  second  Parliament  found  this  expedition  an  addi- 
tional grievance.  Sir  John  Eliot,  Vice-admiral  of  Devon, 
Parliament  \e&  the  attack,  and  the  favourite  was  im- 
of  1626.  peached.  This,  again,  was  more  than  Charles 

would  permit,  and  the  Houses  were  dissolved  after  de- 
manding the  dismissal  of  Buckingham  as  an  enemy  of 
church  and  state. 

The  French  alliance  was  becoming  too  great  a  strain 
on  Charles's  temper.  He  was  vexed  that  the  ships  which 
War  with  he  lent  to  his  ally  were  used  against  the  re- 
France.  1627.  bellious  French  Protestants  at  La  Rochelle, 
though  it  was  for  this  very  end  that  Louis  XIII.  had 
borrowed  them.  He  was  annoyed  by  the  claims  of  his 
wife  to  regulate  her  household,  and  he  dismissed  her 
French  attendants.  He  was  of  course  quite  unable  to 
fulfil  his  promises  to  tolerate  Roman  Catholics,  and  in 
•1627  a  war  with  France  was  the  natural  result.  Bucking- 
ham started  to  attack  the  island  of  Rhe',  from  which 
Rochelle  was  menaced. 

The  expedition,  however,  proved  an  even  more  dismal 
failure  than  that  of  Cadiz,  and  Parliament  met  in  1628  to 
Parliament  present  an  ever-increasing  list  of  grievances, 
ofieas.  These  now  take  clear  shape.  The  exaction 

of  forced  loans  and  benevolences,  the  imprisonment  of 
men  by  the  Royal  power  alone,  the  billeting  of  recruits 
in  private  houses,  and  the  use  of  martial  law,  were  de- 


ARMINIANISM.  23 

clared  to  be  against  the  rights  of  Englishmen;  and  Charles, 
after  some  attempts  at  resistance,  was  compelled  to  agree 
to  this  "Petition  of  Right". 

But  it  was  not  only  in  political  matters  that  Parliament 
was  determined  to  make  a  stand.  They  complained  bit- 
terly of  the  "Arminians".1  This  was  a  name  -,. 

•  T  11-1-11          i/--i       The         " 

given  to  Laud  and  his  high-church  friends,  ian"  griev 
who  were  carrying  the  king  with  them  in  their  ance' 
resistance  to  Puritanism.  They  refused  to  acquiesce  in 
the  extreme  forms  of  Protestantism  which  had  been  for  a 
long  time  in  force  on  the  Continent,  and  to  which  the 
Puritans  wished  to  bind  the  English  church.  This  de- 
velopment of  Protestantism  was  called  Calvinism,  from 
the  French  reformer  Calvin,  who  had  led  the  movement 
in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  whose  teaching  had  been 
largely  accepted  in  Switzerland  and  other  places.  One 
of  his  chief  tenets  was  "Predestination".  He  taught  that 
God  had  once  for  all  chosen  His  elect  by  His  mere  will 
and  pleasure,  and  to  the  number  of  those  there  could  be 
no  additions.  This  was  felt  by  many  to  be  opposed  to 
the  idea  of  a  merciful  God  who  called  upon  men  to  repent 
and  accept  salvation.  English  churchmen  resisted  this 
Calvinism,  and  maintained  that  the  teaching  and  cere- 
monies of  the  English  church  were  to  be  looked  for  in 
her  history,  and  that  she  could  repudiate  the  errors  of 
Rome  without  needing  the  hard  teaching  of  the  extreme 
Reformers.  But  the  fact  that  the  Churchmen  firmly  be- 
lieved that  the  Commons  were  only  resisting  the  king  for 
their  private  ends,  and  were  encouraged  by  Royal  favour 
to  say  as  much,  complicated  the  religious  difficulty  by 
making  it  political. 

In  the  summer  of  the  year  1628  Buckingham  was  as- 
sassinated at  Portsmouth  while  preparing  an  expedition 
to  relieve  the  Huguenots  in  Rochelle.     An   charles 
officer  named  Felton,  who  grew  angry  at  not   against  Par- 
getting promotion,  brooded  over  his  wrongs, 
and  began  to  attribute  them  to  the  man  who  was  spoken 

1  So  called  from  Arminius,  a  Dutchman,  who  led  the  opposition  to  Calvinism 
in  Holland. 


•      24  THE   DISSOLUTION    OF    1629. 

of  in  Parliament  as  the  enemy  of  his  country.  He  was 
at  last  driven  by  such  thoughts 'to  the  terrible  crime  of 
murdering  the  hated  duke  by  stabbing  him.  The  king 
was  thus  left  to  conduct  his  own  government.  The  way 
seemed  open  for  a  better  understanding.  Much  might 
have  been  done  now,  for  the  Houses  would  have  wel- 
comed any  attempt  to  work  with  them.  Pym,  the  future 
parliamentary  leader,  and  Eliot,  the  future  martyr  to 
liberty,  were  alike  anxious  to  see  king  and  Parliament  in 
harmony.  Not  a  word  had  been  said  against  Charles 
personally.  Even  a  Puritan  writer,  who  did  not  scruple 
to  describe  the  bishops  as  "  knobs  and  wens  and  bunchy 
popish  flesh",  had  a  kind  word  for  the  "good,  harmless 

V  king". 

\      But  Charles  was  dogmatically  sure  of  his  path,  and  in- 

\)  sisted  on  his  right  to  levy  tunnage  and  poundage  without 
Religious  and  Srant>  holding  that  it  was  not  included  in  his 
financial  renunciation  of  "  gifts,  loans,  taxes,  or  bene- 

grievances.       volences »    in    the    petition    of    Right.       The 

leaders  of  the  House  encouraged  merchants  to  refuse 
payment.  They  were  also  thoroughly  alarmed  at  "  inno- 
vations" in  religion,  and  determined  to  put  their  case 
before  the  country.  Three  resolutions  were  passed,  de- 
claring those  who  introduced  religious  innovations,  paid 
tunnage  and  poundage,  or  exacted  it,  to  be  enemies  of 
the  country.  The  Speaker,  who  wished  to  abscond,  was 
meanwhile  held  in  the  chair  by  excited  Puritan  members, 
and  the  doors  locked  to  prevent  the  dissolution  which 
they  knew  to  be  imminent,  and  which  followed  as  a  matter 
of  course. 

The  king  now  determined  to  rule  without  Parliament, 
and  for  eleven  years  he  managed  to  get  along  somehow 
Absolute  without  one.  Eliot  and  others  were  im- 
ruie.  1639.  prisoned  for  their  recent  action  in  the  House, 
and  the  judges  were  induced  to  refuse  them  liberty  un- 
less they  acknowledged  their  fault  and  promised  amend- 
ment. This  was  refused  by  some,  and  Eliot  died  in 
prison  three  years  later. 

Peace  had  of  course  to  be  made  with   France  and 


THE   SHIP-MONEY  WRITS.  25 

Spain  (1630),  and  though  Charles  had  a  fine  opportunity 
for  recovering  the  Palatinate  he  was  obliged  Foreign  policy 
to  refuse  it.  Gustavus  Adolphus,  King  of  and  ship- 
Sweden,  the  greatest  warrior  of  the  age, m 
carried  all  before  him  in  Germany;  but  the  English  king 
had  no  power  to  back  him,  and  the  Protestant  champion 
fell  on  the  field  of  Liitzen  in  1632.  Yet,  Charles  was 
not  inclined  to  abandon  his  sister's  cause.  In  1633  he 
returned  to  his  father's  futile  hope,  and  actually  allied 
with  Spain  against  the  Dutch  in  order  to  get  Spanish 
help  in  the  matter  of  the  Palatinate.  He  required  a  fleet, 
and  revived  an  old  custom  by  which  maritime  counties 
were  obliged  to  supply  ships  and  money  in  time  of 
danger.  As  he  dared  not  announce  his  Spanish  intrigue, 
even  to  his  council,  he  issued  his  first  writ  of  Ship-money 
in  1634  on  the  plea  that  channel  pirates  must  be  put 
down.  The  fleet  sailed  about  the  channel  but  accom- 
plished nothing,  and  as  France  and  Holland  now  com- 
bined against  Spain  there  was  small  hope  of  her  interven- 
tion to  secure  Charles's  family  interests  in  the  Palatinate. 
In  1633  two  events  of  profound  import  occurred. 
Wentworth  was  made  Lord  Deputy  of  Ireland,  and 
Laud  succeeded  Abbott  as  Archbishop  of  Wentworth 
Canterbury.  For  seven  years  Ireland  was  and  Laud- 
ruled  by  a  fearless  and  strong  hand.  Wentworth  knew 
that  it  required  both.  "Where  I  found  a  church,  a 
crown,  and  a  people  spoiled,  I  could  not  imagine  to 
redeem  them  with  gracious  smiles  and  gentle  looks.  It 
would  cost  warmer  water  than  so."  This  was  his  own 
account  of  his  prospects,  and  he  certainly  followed  it  out. 
In  a  few  years  he  modelled  and  disciplined  a  standing 
army,  cleared  the  coasts  of  pirates,  intFO€krced  some 
manufactures,  started  the  growing  of  ilax,  and  reformed 
the  church  system.  But  he  forgot  to  be  careful  about  the 
means  he  used.  In  order  to  get  land  for  colonists  he 
violated  some  concessions  known  as  the  "Graces",  which 
had  secured  the  native  lords  against  such  possible  confis- 
cations. He  brushed  aside  legal  and  constitutional  rules 
as  easily  as  he  crossed  the  ideas  and  customs  which 


26  ARCHBISHOP   LAUD. 

centuries  of  use  had  endeared  to  the  people.  His  objects 
were  noble,  his  achievements  were  great,  but  his  lasting 
success  was  nil.  He  won  no  hearts. 

What  Wentworth  sought  in  Ireland  Laud  sought  in 
England — unity  by  means  of  enforced  uniformity.  For 
The  Laudian  both  the  lever  was  the  Royal  power.  For 
system.  both  the  watchword  was  "  thorough  ".  Laud 

used  the  Star  Chamber  and  High  Commission  Court  to 
force  Englishmen  into  a  groove.  He  spared  neither  rank 
nor  creed.  He  wished  to  punish  the  immorality  of  the 
rich,  the  nonconformity  of  the  Puritan,  and  the  recusancy 
of  the  Roman  Catholic.  The  object,  unity,  was  as  noble 
as  Strafford's,  but  the  methods  were  as  fatal  to  real 
success.  Laud  wished  to  see  the  Church  one  in  the 
"Beauty  of  Holiness";  one  in  belief,  one  in  ceremonial, 
one  in  resistance  to  Romanism. 

This  was  impossible.  There  were  good  and  holy  men 
who  were  unable  to  agree  with  him,  and  there  were  also 
Twofold  those  whose  scurrilous  language  and  irreverent 
resistance.  ways  were  a  legacy  from  the  fierce  struggles 
of  the  early  days  of  the  Reformation.  Some  of  these 
ardent  Puritans,  disappointed  at  the  failure  of  the  Mil- 
lenary Petition  and  Hampton  Court  Conference,  had 
already  left  their  country  to  seek  a  new  home  where  they 
could  worship  without  interference.  These  "  Pilgrim 
Fathers"  sailed  in  the  Mayflower  (1620)  to  the  shores 
of  North  America.  Here  they  formed  a  colony,  soon 
to  become  the  great  state  of  New  England.  Among 
those  who  remained  at  home,  there  was  a  feeling  that 
the  outward  forms,  to  which  the  Archbishop  exacted 
conformity,  were  really  a  pathway  to  Rome.  Thus  men 
refused  to  bow  at  the  Sacred  Name,  to  kneel  at  Holy 
Communion,  to  use  the  Communion  Table  anywhere 
but  in  the  centre  of  the  church.  Though  we  can  now 
acquit  Laud  of  any  desire  or  intention  of  being  untrue  to 
the  national  church,  there  were  not  wanting  signs  which 
led  honest  men  to  think  otherwise.  A  papal  messenger 
was  long  at  the  court  on  friendly  terms  with  king  and 
ministers.  Roman  Catholic  converts  were  sure  of  the 


HAMPDEN   AND  SHIP-MONEY.  2J 

queen's  protection,  and  the  chapels  of  her  majesty  and 
the  foreign  ambassadors  were  neutral  ground.  If  this 
was  only  tolerant  we  must  not  forget  that  it  was  also 
illegal,  and  to  the  majority  of  Englishmen  incomprehen- 
sible, except  on  the  basis  of  a  deeply-laid  scheme  to 
restore  the  church  to  the  Pope.  Men  were  imprisoned, 
whipped,  pilloried,  and  mutilated  for  libels  on  the 
bishops.  Of  these  victims  the  best  known  is  Prynne,  who 
had  already  been  punished  by  the  Star  Chamber  for  a 
book  condemning  stage-plays,  which  was  thought  to  con- 
tain some  aspersions  on  the  theatre-loving  queen.  In 
1636  he  was  a  second  time  pilloried,  and  the  remains  of 
his  ears  shorn  off. 

The  national  feeling  was  shown  by  the  open  sympathy 
which  such  men  received.  But  there  was  no  sign  of  a 
cessation  of  the  system.  In  1635  Ship-money  sovereignty 
was  demanded  in  a  second  writ  which  ^x-  of  king  or  of 
tended  the  tax  to  inland  counties  and  towns.  * 
The  king  consulted  the  judges  and  published  their 
answer,  which  declared  that  he  could  legally  order  such 
payment,  and  "was  the  sole  judge  of  the  danger"  which 
justified  such  unusual  demands.  But  it  was  clear  there 
was  no  immediate  danger.  The  nation  required  a  defen- 
sive system  for  which  Parliament  might  easily  have  been 
summoned.  To  pretend  that  a  discretionary  power, 
which  is  necessary  in  an  emergency,  had  become  part  of 
the  ordinary  law  of  the  land,  was  to  raise  the  question 
whether  Parliament  was  more  than  a  name  in  England. 
The  freedom  of  the  nation  was  at  stake. 

In  1636  a  third  Ship-money  writ  followed,  and  a 
gentleman  of  Buckinghamshire,  named  John  Hampden, 
whose  contribution  was  assessed  at  twenty  would  Eng- 
shillings,  determined  to  refuse  payment  and  land  submit? 
have  the  matter  tried  in  a  law-court.  His  counsel  took 
their  stand  on  ancient  laws,  concluding  with  an  appeal  to 
the  Petition  of  Right,  and  urged  that  no  man  was  bound 
to  pay  taxes  except  when  granted  by  Parliament.  The 
judges,  however,  adopted  the  theory  that  the  king  had 
a  right  to  command,  since  he  was  the  soul  of  the  body 

(962)  C 


28  THE   SCOTTISH    REBELLION. 

politic,  and  by  a  narrow  majority  gave  judgment  for  the 
crown.  Ship-money  was  not  the  only  means  taken  by 
Charles  to  fill  his  coffers  and  avoid  a  Parliament.  Ancient 
forest  rights  were  revived,  and  men  were  fined  for  infring- 
ing them;  compulsory  knighthood,  a  relic  of  the  feudal 
age,  was  revived,  and  fines  demanded  for  exemption; 
monopolies  were  granted  to  companies,  since  a  law  of 
1624  forbade  them  to  individuals;  and  the  customs  were 
collected  and  increased,  though,  as  we  have  seen,  they 
had  never  been  granted  to  Charles  by  Parliament.  Yet, 
the  king  seemed  secure  in  his  course.  There  were  no 
newspapers,  railways,  or  meetings  to  make  the  national 
disgust  articulate.  Nothing  but  a  Parliament  could  focus 
the  religious  and  constitutional  opposition  to  the  system 
of  "  thorough ",  and  since  the  king  was  determined  to 
avoid  all  foreign  complications  there  seemed  no  prospect 
of  such  an  assembly  being  summoned. 

The  blow  which  shattered  this  system  came  from 
Scotland.  James  had  irritated  the  Presbyterians  by  his 
The  Scots'  bishops  and  ceremonies,  but  Charles  did 
resistance.  worse.  He  visited  Scotland  in  1633  and 
gave  the  bishops  a  footing  they  had  never  had  before. 
They  were  promoted  to  political  office,  and  the  chief 
power  in  the  Scottish  Parliament.  This  sent  even  the 
nobles,  although  they  feared  and  disliked  the  democratic 
Presbyterian  clergy,  into  the  arms  of  the  kirk.  But  worse 
was  yet  to  come.  Laud  and  his  master  were  determined 
to  unite  England  with  Scotland  in  religion  as  a  step 
towards  complete  political  union.  To  this  end  canons, 
which  enforced  a  new  Prayer-book  and  a  ceremonial 
foreign  to  the  Scottish  Church,  were  prepared  in  1636. 
Charles  had  already  been  warned  not  to  "  import  a  servi- 
tude on  this  church  not  practised  before",  but  he  knew 
not  the  meaning  of  a  nation's  feelings.  When  in  1637 
the  new  service  book  appeared  it  was  described  as  the 
"  Mass  in  English  ",  and  a  riot  occurred  in  July  when  it 
was  introduced  at  St.  Giles's  in  Edinburgh. 

Charles  had  at  last  roused  a  resistance  which  was 
national.  The  Scots  nobles,  clergy,  and  people,  with 


THE    COVENANT.  29 

very  few  exceptions,  refused  to  admit  that  their  religion 
could  be  touched  except  by  national  assent.  And  they 
did  not  need  to  wait  for  a  Parliament  to  Covenant  and 
express  their  meaning,  for  the  very  nature  Assembly, 
of  Presbyterian  organization  was  political.  T  3  ' 
Each  parish  had  its  "kirk-session",  whose  representatives 
sat  in  the  Provincial  Synod;  while  the  whole  church  met 
in  a  National  Assembly,  where  laymen  and  clergymen 
attended  on  behalf  of  every  congregation.  A  church  so 
organized  could  not  be  tampered  with.  Petitions  poured 
in  from  the  parishes,  commissioners  were  elected  to  meet 
in  Edinburgh,  and  in  1638  a  National  Covenant  was 
ready  for  signature.  It  pledged  the  Scots  to  resist  all 
popery  and  innovations,  and  was  signed  by  high  and  low. 
An  assembly  met  at  Glasgow  which  scouted  the  king's 
attempts  to  check  its  action,  and  swept  away  at  one  blow 
Episcopacy  and  Perth  Articles. 

Charles,  having  no  standing  army,  was  not  ready  with 
the  weapons  of  force :  he  began  to  temporize.  His  offers 
to  modify  the  position  he  had  taken  up  were  what  would 
refused ;  the  Scots,  now  fully  roused,  would  Charles  do  ? 
be  content  with  nothing  less  than  an  acknowledgment  of 
their  absolute  freedom  in  religious  matters.  The  difficulty 
before  the  king  was  great.  He  had  no  army,  no  money, 
and  no  friends.  The  English  feeling  during  the  three 
years  of  struggle  was  largely  in  favour  of  the  Scots.  Laud 
was  mobbed  in  London,  and  a  daring  hand  placarded  the 
Royal  Palace  "to  let".  The  Scots  knew  how  to  avail 
themselves  of  this,  and  more  than  once  appealed  to  the 
English  nation.  There  were  two  plans  before  the  king. 
Wentworth  wrote  advising  a  delay  of  hostilities,  fortifying 
of  the  border,  blockading  of  Scottish  ports,  to  "  keep  the 
blue  bonnet  to  his  peck  of  oatmeal",  and  careful  training 
of  a  force  for  action  in  the  coming  year.  But  this  could 
only  be  done  if  money  were  forthcoming,  and  there  was 
little  hope  of  that.  The  king  determined  on  war.  The 
Scots  were  ready.  They  had  collected  a  large  force  at 
Dunse,  on  the  border,  under  a  veteran  soldier,  Alexander 
Leslie,  and  their  historian  Baillie  describes  them  as  con- 


30  THE    BISHOPS'   WAR. 

stantly  preaching,  praying,  and  drilling.  Puritanism  had 
become  the  church  militant.  What  had  the  English  king 
with  which  to  meet  this  enthusiasm? 

He  rode  to  York  and  on  to  Berwick,  but  the  forces 
which  had  been  got  together  were  both  badly  disciplined 
Pacification  of  and  half-hearted,  in  marked  contrast  to  the 

Sy^sho'rt"  rebels  a  few  miles  off-  In  June>  l639>  a 
Parliament,  verbal  treaty  was  made  at  Berwick,  in  which 

no  real  settlement  was  made,  and  a  General  Assembly  and 
a  Parliament  promised  to  the  Scots.  When  these  met  in 
August  they  demanded  the  abolition  of  Episcopacy  and 
a  veto  on  the  king's  appointment  of  commanders  in  the 
Royal  castles.  Charles,  failing  to  see  that  he  was  expected 
to  play  the  part  of  a  conquered  enemy,  at  once  accepted 
Wentworth's  proposal  to  rely  on  his  English  Parliament. 
After  eleven  years'  silence  the  representatives  of  England 
met  again  in  the  Short  Parliament,  April  13,  1640.  They 
sat  for  three  weeks.  Pym  stated  the  feeling  of  the  nation 
when  he  claimed  for  Parliament  that  position  as  "the  soul 
of  the  body  politic"  which  Charles  had  so  long  claimed  for 
himself.  The  grievances  of  eleven  years  were  put  forward 
and  discussed.  The  king  attempted  to  rouse  enthusiasm 
against  the  Scots  by  exhibiting  a  letter  addressed  "Au 
roi ",  which  the  latter  had,  perhaps,  intended  to  send  to 
the  King  of  France.  But  this  seemed  a  trifle  compared 
to  the  three  writs  of  Ship-money.  Parliament  was  clearly 
not  to  be  moved  to  abandon  its  claims.  Nor  would  it 
give  the  government  a  penny  to  fight  with,  and  the  inevitable 
dissolution  followed  on  May  5,  1640. 

This  time  Wentworth,  now  Earl  of  Strafford,  wished  for 
no  delay.  He  gave  his  advice  at  a  meeting  of  the  Privy 
Stafford's  Council,  in  which  he  urged  the  king's  right  to 
programme.  gO  on  wjfn  the  wajj  "  loose  and  absolved  from 
all  rules  of  government".  "  You  have  an  army  in  Ireland," 
he  is  reported  to  have  added,  "  which  you  may  employ 
here  to  reduce  this  kingdom."  Though  this  speech  was 
to  cost  him  his  life,  which  was  even  now  in  danger  from 
a  terrible  disease,  its  import  was  greater  for  his  country 
than  for  himself.  Once  before  Strafford  had  urged  the 


A  SCOTTISH   VICTORY.  31 

king  to  govern  England  as  he  had  himself  been  ruling 
Ireland,  and  the  conviction  that  Charles  meant  to  do  so 
was  to  grow  until  it  severed  the  nation  into  two  hostile 
camps. 

On  August  20,  1640,  Charles  left  London,  and  the 
Scots,  who  were  again  ready  to  fight  for  religious  inde- 
pendence, crossed  the  border  on  the  same  Second 
day.  This  time  there  was  no  hesitation :  they  SSf 
forced  a  passage  of  the  Tyne  at  Newburn  on  Ripon. 
the  28th,  and  occupied  the  Northern  counties,  the  Royal 
army  gradually  falling  back  before  them.  The  king,  being 
without  money  or  means  of  obtaining  a  reliable  force, 
summoned  a  Great  Council  at  York,  which  could  only 
suggest  a  Parliament  and  a  fresh  negotiation  with  the  rebel 
Scots.  At  Ripon  the  king  agreed  to  pay  the  latter  ^850 
a  day  while  they  remained  in  England,  which  they  meant 
to  do  until  they  obtained  a  peace  and  religious  settlement 
after  their  own  wishes..  Thereon  commissioners  were 
appointed  and  the  negotiations  were  to  be  re-opened  in 
London. 

Stafford's  advice  had  not  been  followed.  All  classes 
of  Englishmen,  from  the  peers  at  York  to  the  'prentices 
in  London,  were  at  last  fully  roused.  While  The  king's 
the  former  urged  the  necessity  of  reliance  on  lesson. 
Parliament,  the  latter  tore  down  the  posters  which  pro- 
claimed the  Scots  as  rebels.  It  would  have  been  well  if 
the  king  had  now  been  convinced  that  no  reliance  on  a 
man,  or  a  theory,  or  a  party  can  enable  government  to 
conquer  a  national  spirit  which  it  will  not  lead.  But  this 
was  a  lesson  Charles  never  learnt,  though  his  failure  has 
taught  it  to  succeeding  ages. 


A 


32  TRIAL    OF    STRAFFORD. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

FROM  THE  MEETING  OF  THE  LONG  PARLIAMENT  TO  THE 
COMMENCEMENT  OF  THE  CIVIL  WAR:  NOV.  3,  1640 — 
AUG.  22,  1642. 

When  the  Long  Parliament  met  on  Nov.  3,  1640,  there 
was  among  its  members  no  clear  plan  of  action,  and  cer- 
Reform  with  tainly  no  idea  of  rebellion.  There  was  an 
the  king.  almost  universal  feeling  in  favour  of  a  thorough 
reform,  not  of  the  constitution,  but  of  that  which  contem- 
poraries call  the  "state  of  the  kingdom".  But  it  was  to 
be  done  with  the  king  and  not  despite  him.  King  and 
people,  it  was  said,  needed  each  other,  and  "  reciprocation 
is  the  strongest  union".  The  interest  of  the  first  period 
is  to  watch  the  collapse  of  this  noble  ideal  as  soon  as  it 
became  evident  that  the  two  conditions,  trust  and  mutual 
understanding,  were  wanting. 

The  first  object  was  to  vindicate  law  and  restore  the 
rights  of  Parliament.  "  We  are  assembled  to  do  God's 
Earl  business  and  the  king's,"  said  a  foremost 

measures  of  speaker:  this  meant  doing  away  with  Straf- 
ford's  influence  and  Laud's  power.  Accord- 
ingly they  were  both  impeached,  together  with  others  who 
were  responsible  for  arbitrary  acts.  This  challenge  to 
the  power  above  the  law  was  marked  by  the  release  of 
Prynne  and  others  imprisoned  by  the  Star  Chamber  and 
High  Commission  Court.  The  "  Triennial  Act ",  provid- 
ing that  a  Parliament  should  meet  even  without  a  Royal 
summons,  after  three  years  had  elapsed  since  it  last  sat, 
was  then  passed. 

The  trial  of  Strafford  was  delayed  till  March,  1641. 
He  was  accused  of  an  intention  to  upset  the  rule  of  law 
Trial  of  ar>d  replace  it-  by  arbitrary  government. 
Strafford.  Besides  many  acts  and  sayings,  in  Ireland 
and  in  his  Northern  Presidency,  alleged  against  him  to 
prove  this,  there  was  his  speech  in  the  Privy  Council,  in 
which  he  was  accused  of  telling  the  king  to  govern  as  he 


STRAFFORD'S   ATTAINDER.  33 

thought  best,  there  being  an  army  in  Ireland  which  could 
be  used  against  "this  kingdom".  Now,  "this  kingdom" 
might  mean  Scotland,  which  was  then  in  rebellion ;  but  it 
might  also  mean  England,  and  the  Commons  felt  sure  it 
did.  It  was  difficult  to  prove  that  the  acts  of  which  he 
was  accused  were  treasonable,  for  they  were  not  in  any 
way  directed  against  the  king;  and  the  law  knew  nothing 
of  any  other  treason.  The  expression  of  an  opinion 
might,  as  Strafford  urged,  make  a  heretic  but  not  a 
traitor;  and  the  two  witnesses  required  by  law  to  depose 
their  knowledge  to  treasonable  acts  were  not  forthcoming, 
unless,  indeed,  a  surreptitious  copy  made  by  the  younger 
Vane  of  the  notes  taken  by  his  father,  a  member  of  the 
Privy  Council  at  the  fatal  sitting,  could  be  reckoned  a 
sufficient  second  witness.  The  Commons  began  to  fear 
that  the  Lords  would  not  condemn  Strafford,  and  there- 
fore substituted  a  Bill  of  Attainder.1  This  only  required 
a  majority  of  opinion  that  Strafford  was  a  traitor,  and 
thus  shifted  the  question  from  a  legal  to  a  political  one. 
The  Commons  held  a  noble  theory  of  treason :  "  Treason 
which  is  against  the  kingdom  is  more  against  the  king 
than  that  which  is  against  his  person " :  but  this  was  not 
law.  Some  of  them  claimed  to  be  above  the  law  in  such 
a  crisis.  They  were  beginning  to  learn  that  the  theory 
of  Divine  right  was  double-edged,  and  might  be  claimed 
by  parliaments  no  less  than  by  kings.  The  bill  was  passed, 
and  the  Lords  were  induced  to  accept  it  by  various 
rumours  (not  without  foundation)  that  the  king's  party  /' 
was  tampering  with  the  army  in  the  north.  Charles  signed"/ 
it — it  was  the  meanest  moment  in  his  life — and  gave 
away  the  life  of  his  faithful  servant,  though  he  had  pledged 
his  word  to  Strafford  for  his  safety:  but  Charles  was 
influenced  by  mobs  without  and  by  casuistry  within.  The 
former  threatened  the  lives  of  those  he  held  dearest, 
while  the  latter  taught  him  to  regard  his  duty  as  a  king  as 
unconnected  with  his  promise  as  a  man.  Strafford  died 

1An  impeachment  is  a  trial  before  the  Lords,  in  which  the  accused  has  his 
chance  of  defending  himself:  an  attainder  is  a  mere  declaratory  bill  stating  that 
the  accused  has  committed  treason  and  shall  be  punished  for  it. 


34  CHARLES  GOES  TO  SCOTLAND. 

on  Tower  Hill,  May  12,  1641.  At  the  same  time  a  bill 
t  was  passed  that  this  Parliament  should  not  be  dissolved 
J  without  its  own  consent.  This  exceptional  guarantee  for 
its  political  stability  was  necessary  if  Parliament  was  to 
regain  its  position  after  eleven  years  of  non-existence. 
The  ground  for  a  reformed  system  of  law  and  govern- 
ment was  further  cleared  by  the  abolition  of  the  Star 
Chamber,  the  High  Commission  Court,  and  other  extra- 
legal  courts  in  Wales  and  the  North.  The  most  sacred 
principle  of  the  old  constitution  was  vindicated  by  the 
reversal  of  the  Hampden  judgment  on  ship-money,  and 
by  a  clear  surrender  of  the  royal  claim  to  take  customs 
vwithdut  Parliamentary  consent. 

4  Charles  now  appeared  to  have  given  in.  and  the  reform 
seemed  complete.  But  at  this  moment  he  announced  his 
The  king  win  intention  ot  going  to  Scotland,  which  might 
Parjfam^lt!1  niean  further  intrigues  with  the  army.  Pym 
June,  1641.  and  the  leaders  saw  this  would  not  add  to  the 
harmony  upon  which  the  new  state  of  things  depended, 
and  cleverly  united  the  Lords  and  Commons,  who  had 
shown  signs  of  disagreement,  by  the  production  of  a  docu- 
ment called  the  "Ten  Propositions".  TJiese  asked  the 
king  to  disband  the  Irish  and  English  armies,  to  delay 
his  journey,,  and  to  put  his  affairs  in  the  hands  of  those 
whom  Parliament  could  trust.  For  the  moment,  how- 
ever, little  notice  was  taken  of  this  motion,  and  when 
Charles  departed  for  Scotland  in  August,  1641,  a  suspi- 
cious but  still  united  Parliament  was  left  behind  him. 

Suspicion  was  to  increase,  unity  to  diminish.  So  far 
the  Parliament  had  been  completely  successful  both  in 
The  begin-  clearing  the  ground  of  the  instruments  of  arbi- 
unlon0andS"  trary  government  and  in  consolidating  their 
revolution.  Own  position :  law  had  been  restored,  and  the 
legislature  vindicated.  Put  th<^  supreme  object,  reform 
king,  had  failed:  he  was  not  in  touch  with  the 


Parliamentary  leaders,  and  it  was  clear  that  they  must 
base  their  further  progress  on  support  outside  their  walls. 
For   this   the   ground   was   already   prepared,    but   it 
involved  the  danger  of  a  split  among  themselves.     To 


A   PARTY   FOR  THE   KING.  35 

understand  this  we  must  go  back  and  trace  the  gradual  for- 
mation in  Parliament  of  a  church  party  prepared  to  resist 
the  Puritan  extremes  which  Pym  allowed  to 

c  11  T-U-  f         i.  '  f  Disunion. 

his  followers.  This  is  of  vast  importance,  for, 
though  there  was  now  no  court  party  to  be  reckoned  with, 
apy  violent  action  inspired  by  Puritanism  would  rouse  a 
.church  party  which  would  sooner  trust  the  king  than 
allow  the  church  to  be  pulled  down.  Early  in  the  session 
there  had  been  an  animated  debate  on  a  petition  to  abolish 
Episcopacy,  some  wishing  to  consider  it,  others,  while 
willing  to  modify  the  power  of  the  bishops,  being  averse 
to  any  idea  of  abolishing  the  office.  A  "  Root  and 
Branch  "  party,  pledged  to  destroy  Episcopacy,  was  thus 
face  to  face  with  men  like  Hyde  and  Culpeper,  who  were 
opposed  to  such  extremes  quite  as  much  as  to  arbitrary 
government.  The  Commons  had  issued  a  commission 
to  deface  and  demolish  crucifixes  and  images,  while  the 
House  of  Lords  had  appointed  a  committee  to  discuss 
ecclesiastical  innovations  with  a  bishop  in  the  chair.  The 
Scots  commissioners  in  London  were  working  against 
Episcopacy,  and  there  was  a  strong  and  growing  feeling 
that  Scots  had  no  right  to  meddle.  The  London  citizens 
might  present  petitions  against  Episcopacy  "  in  their  best 
apparel",  but  many  felt,  and  one  member  said,  that  "a 
parity  in  the  Church  "  must  lead  to  a  "  parity  in  the  Com- 
monwealth". It  was  thus  clear  that  if  Pym  and  his  party 
put  the  church  question  in  the  front  rank  the  unanimity 
against  the  king  would  be  at  an  end.  They  did  so, 
nevertheless. 

There  was  therefore  a  considerable  reaction  in  favour 
of  Charles  at  the  end  of  1641;  he  had  given  way  to 
all  demands,  he  had  surrendered  his  old  „ 

,    .  ,        ,       ,  .  ,  Charles  gams 

advisers,  he  had  gone  to  Scotland  with  no  bythisdis- 
bad  effect  on  the  English  army;  the  bishops  union' 
were  not  without   their  supporters;   the  Scots  were  not 
everywhere   popular,  and   there  was  a  feeling   that   the 
"  lads  at  Newcastle  "  had  been  the  mainstay  of  the  rapid 
Parliamentary  success  since  October,  1640. 

The  Commons  precipitated  a  split  on  religion  by  an 


36  A  REVOLUTIONARY  MOVEMENT. 

ordinance  (Sep.  1641)  against  the  Laudian  ceremonies, 
Further  an^  tne  Sunday  sports.  The  Lords  replied 
religious  by  ordering  the  services  to  be  conducted  in 
accordance  with  the  law  of  the  land.  This 
gave  Charles  a  chance,  and  he  seized  it.  He  took  up 
this  attitude  of  obedience  to  law  and  announced  that  he 
would  maintain  the  Church  as  in  Elizabeth's  day. 

But  Charles  never  knew  how  to  play  his  own  game 
even  when  he  had  winning  cards.  An  event  in  Scotland 
Suspicions  increased  the  suspicions  of  Parliament.  The 
increasing.  "Incident",  as  it  was  called,  arose  from  a 
quarrel  among  the  Scottish  nobles.  Mon- 
trose  was  opposed  to  the  democratic  form  of  government 
for  which  Covenanters  under  Argyle  were  striving. 
Hamilton  was  intimate  with  Argyle,  and  Montrose 
offered  to  prove  him  a  traitor;  a  plot  was  formed  by 
certain  other  nobles  to  arrest  and  carry  off  Hamilton  and 
Argyle,  and  it  was  rumoured  that  Charles  was  concerned 
in  it.  This  was  not  at  all  likely,  but  his  motives  in  going 
to  Scotland  were  suspicious,  and  it  was  believed  in  Eng- 
land that  some  such  attempts  were  contemplated  against 
English  leaders.  Parliament  voted  for  itself  a  guard  to 
be  placed  round  the  Houses,  though  members  who  were 
estranged  from  the  majority  on  church  matters  ridiculed 
this  alarm.  It  was  clear  that  the  split  in  Parliament  was 
complete,  and  that  Charles  would  have  a  party  to  depend 
upon  and  a  cause  to  maintain. 

The  Irish  rebellion,  which  broke  out  in  1641,  attended 
with  horrid  massacres  of  Protestants,  brought  matters  to 
An  ultimatum  a  head.  It  was  at  once  said  that  Charles  and 
to  the  king,  the  queen  were  concerned  in  this  rising  of 
Roman  Catholics  against  Protestants.  There  was  im- 
mediate need  of  action  to  suppress  it.  Parliament  had 
been  taking  upon  itself  to  issue  ordinances  without  Royal 
sanction  during  Charles's  absence,  and  now  sent  to  Scot- 
land to  tell  the  king  that,  unless  ministers  approved  by 
Parliament  were  appointed,  they  would  be  compelled  to 
take  measures  for  the  safety  of  the  kingdom  without  him. 
This  was  a  revolutionary  challenge.  Distrust  had  culmi- 


THE   KING  TAKES   HIS   STAND.  37 

nated  in  an  ultimatum.  What  would  be  the  attitude  of 
the  non-Puritan  party?  This  was  soon  to  be  tested.  The 
situation  was  clear.  The  Parliamentary  leaders,  unable 
to  act  with  the  king  in  a  reformed  government,  had  given 
him  the  choice  of  acting  with  them  or  being  neglected. 

Such  a  situation  was  at  once  seized   by  Pym  in  the  N 
"Grand  Remonstrance";  this  re-stated  all  past  grievances 
from  the  accession  of  Charles,  and  concluded  The  Grand 
with  a  fresh  demand   for  ministers  whom  Remonstrance. 
"Parliament  may  have  cause  to  confide  in".  Nov-  m>  l641' 
It  was  a  bold  appeal  to  the  nation  against  the  king.    The  / 
Remonstrance  was  carried  by  the  narrow  majority  of  i  ij 
-arid  tbp  ?plit  in  the  Long  Parliament  was  complete. 

Charles  had  now  returned  from  Scotland,  where  he  had 
recklessly  yielded  to  demands  without  obtaining  a  party 
on  his  side.  Once  in  London  he  set  to  work  charles-s acti0n 
to  court  popularity,  made  a  foolish  speech  at  increases 
the  Guildhall,  referring  to  his  favour  with  all  distrust- 
but  the  lower  classes,  and  withdrew  the  guards  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  In  his  answer  to  the  Remonstrance 
he  took  his  stand  on  the  strict  letter  of  the  law;  he  would 
support  government  in  church  and  state  as  it  was  estab- 
lished. This  gave  no  security  for  that  Parliamentary 
control  over  the  king's  ministers  upon  which  Pym  and  his 
followers  were  set.  How  far  suspicion  carried  the  con- 
stitutional leaders  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  their 
next  step  was  a  bill  to  transfer  to  the  Houses  a  share  in 
the  control  of  the  Militia — the  only  armed  force  known 
to  the  ancient  law.  Charles  did  his  best  to  justify  these 
suspicions  by  appointing  a  notorious  bravo  called  Luns- 
ford  to  the  most  important  military  post  in  England,  the 
command  of  the  Tower ;  yet,  a  moment  after,  he  cancelled 
the  appointment  in  deference  to  the  outcry  it  caused. 
The  bishops,  who  had  been  mobbed  on  their  way  to  the 
House,  protested  against  the  legality  of  all  that  took  place 
in  their  absence,  and  Charles  approved  their  action. 
There  was  a  motion  in  the  Lords  that  Parliament  was  not 
free,  and  there  was  a  fear  that  the  king  would  repudiate 
his  past  concessions  and  punish  the  Parliamentary  leaders. 


38  CIVIL  WAR   IMMINENT. 

Finally  Charles  made  the  blunder  of  impeaching  five 
members  of  the  Commons  and  one  peer  "for  endeavour- 
ing to  subvert  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  realm,  to 
deprive  the  king  of  his  power,  and  to  alienate  the  affec-  / 
tions  of  the  people  from  him  ".  It  was  quite  illegal  to  do  v 
this,  as  the  king  cannot  impeach.  But  Charles  went 
further.  When  the  impeachment  failed  he  made  the 
irreparable  mistake  of  going  himself  to  the  House  with 
an  armed  retinue  and  trying  to  seize  the  persons  of  the 
"five  members",  Pym,  Hampden,  Holies,  Hazelrigg,  and 
Strode.  Warned  in  time,  they  had  left  the  House,  and 
Charles  had  to  retire  amid  cries  of  "privilege".  The 
king  had  put  himself  hopelessly  in  the  wrong. 

The  Militia,  question  now  became  a  real  one.  Parlia-y/ 
ment  was  disinclined  to  admit  any  power  in  the  king  to 
Preparing  for  call  out  the  local  forces  of  the  country,  and 
war.  1642.  demanded  that  all  fortresses  and  the  militia 
should  be  confided  to  men  whom  it  could  trust.  This 
Charles  would  not  grant,  and  an  ordinance  for  the  dis- 
posal of  the  militia  was  drawn  up  by  Parliament.  Men 
were  named  in  each  county  to  train  and  order  the  force. 
This  was  finally  agreed  to  by  both  Houses,  and  the  king 
had  already  decided  to  retire  from  London.  It  was 
evident  that  both  sides  were  now  preparing  for  war.  The 
Parliament  had  the  courage  of  its  convictions,  and  as 
Charles  would  not  act  with  the  leaders,  they  took  measures 
for  the  defence  of  the  kingdom.  Hull  was  ordered  to  be 
guarded,  the  port  of  Portsmouth  was  closed,  the  Tower 
was  besieged,  and  the  magazines  all  over  the  country 
were  secured. 

The  question  now  was  whether  any  one  would  fight 
for  a  king  who  had  proved  the  suspicions  entertained  of 
Appeals  to  him  to  be  well  grounded.  Appeal  was  made 
the  nation.  £O  j-^g  nation  by  both  parties  during  the  early 
months  of  1642  in  a  series  of  vigorous  manifestos. 

Charles  took  his  stand  oil  his,  legal  power  as  kinp-.  He 
The  king's  would  not  be  " swaggered  into  any  more  con- 
attitude,  cessions  ".  He  would  maintain  the  church  in- 
tact, though  he  signed  a  Bill  for  removing  Bishops  from 


PAPER   WAR.  39 

the  House  of  Lords.  But  there  was  also  the  Divine 
right  of  himself  and  his  family;  he  would  not  give  up 
"the  power  he  was  born  unto",  nor  prejudice  the  inheri- 
tance of  his  successors.  This  was  a  strong  position. 
attracted^all  those  who  feared  democratic  government, 
who  loved  the  church,  or  who  believed  it  a  sin  to  rebel 
against  the  will  and  person  of  the  king. 

If  Charles  solved  the  problem  of  sovereignty  by  an 
appeal  to  his  pedigree  it  was  impossible  for  the  Parlia- 
mentary leaders,  now  that  they  had  gone  so  parliamentary 
far,  to  stop.      Their  own  solution,  to  which casus  belli- 
they  had  been  gradually  led,  was  a  startling  challenge  to  y 
the  king's.     They  claimed  to  be  the  interpreters  of  the 
national  will,  to  which  the  king's  will  must  finally  bend. 
He  was  an  officer,  not  a  despot.     The  kingdom  was  not  / 
his   property,    but   only   the   sphere  of  his   trusteeship." 
"The  judgment  of  Parliament,"  they  declared,  "is  the 
king's  judgment,  though  the  king  in  his  person  be  neither 
present  nor  assenting  thereunto." 

There  remained  no  solution  but  war,  which  began  with 
a  series  of  races  for  the  possession  of  the  local  magazines 
of  arms,   that  of  Hull   for  instance.     Hull  Taking  mea- 
was,    moreover,   a   strong    post,    in   a   loyal  sures  for  war- 
district   within   easy  reach   of   Scotland.      Charles,    on 
demanding  admission,  was  met  by  the  answer  that  HulW 
could  only  be  opened  to  those  who  possessed  the  king's 
orders  "signified"  by  Parliament.     Here  was  the  new 
theory  put  into  practice.     Parliament  issued  the  Militia 
ordinance,  and  began  assembling  trained-bands  in  London. 
The  paper  war,  to  which  reference  has  been  made,  came 
to  a  head  on  June  2,  1642,  when  the  "Nineteen  Proposi- *  \ 
tions"  were  presented  to  the  king  at  York.     They  placed      V 
him  in  the  position  of  a  figure-head  to  the  constitution, 
and  were  by  his  friends  called  "  Articles  of  Deposition  ". 
Charles  replied  by  issuing  "  commissions  of  array  ",  and 
began  to  assemble  troops.     The  Earl  of  Essex,  a  taciturn 
spldier,  with  a  stern  sense  of  duty,  some  experience,  and 
'not  a  spark  of  genius,  was  made  general  of  the  Parlia- 
mentary forces.     True  to  their  conception  of  sovereignty, 


40  THE  CAUSE  OF  WAR. 

the  leaders  raised  soldiers  who  were  "to  live  and  die 
with  the  Earl  of  Essex  for  the  defence  of  his  majesty 
and  Parliament".  The  king's  standard  was  hoisted  at 
Nottingham  on  the  22d  of  August,  1642. 

The  cause  of  the  Civil  War  has  been  much  in  dispute. 
Was  it  a  religious  or  a  political  struggle?  The  answer  is 
Religion  or  clearly  that  it  was  both.  The  gradual  sun- 
Poiitics?  dering  of  king  and  Parliament  as  the  various 
questions  arose  has  been  shown.  The  question  of 
government  was  insoluble,  because  every  moment  the 
breach  between  the  two  theories  of  the  constitution  grew 
wider.  There  was  no  compromise  possible.  But  the 
nation  might  have  found  a  better -way  had  there  been  no 
religious  severance.  Puritanism  and  its  organization  had 
been  used  as  an  engine  to  coerce  the  king,  and  thus  his 
party  was  made  possible.  "  Let  religion  be  our  primum 
quizrite"  said  a  speaker  in  November,  1640.  The  question 
of  government  and  sovereignty  had,  however,  been  the 
real  one,  and  religion  had  served  to  accentuate  differences 
which  might  otherwise  have  been  almost  unnoticed.  His 
majesty's  will  as  expressed  by  Parliament  was  in  conflict 
with  his  majesty's  will  as  expressed  by  himself,  and  this 
difference  was  rightly  placed  in  the  forefront  of  the 
Parliamentary  programme.  The  question  of  religion  was 
to  regain  its  importance,  and  provide  the  enthusiasm 
with  which  Cromwell  and  Fairfax  would  beat  the  king 
when  their  less  zealous  friends,  the  mere  political  refor- 
mers, had  grown  tired  of  fighting  for  a  cause  which  they 
did  not  understand. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  CIVIL   WAR   TO   THE   KING'S   DEATH,    1642-1649. 

When  war  was  thus  declared  neither  party  had  a  power- 
Division  of     ful  army,  a  definite  plan  of  action,  or  a  sure 

England.  \\Q\&  Qn  any  ]arge  trac(;  ^  fae  countrVi       But} 

roughly  speaking,  it  may  be  said  that  the  North  and  West 


J 

fa 


TAKING  SIDES.  41 


voured  the  king,  while  the  East  and  South,  immeasurably 
the  richer  half  of  England,  adhered  to  Parliament.  Yet 
there  were  local  struggles  in  which  divisions  appeared  in- 
side these  limits;  and  along  the  border-line  between  East 
and  West,  in  Yorkshire,  Staffordshire,  Leicestershire,  War- 
wickshire, Berkshire,  and  Hampshire,  there  was  plentiful 
division. 

The  king  could  reckon  on  the  strong  loyalty  which  was  / 
still  felt  for  his  person  and  for  the  cause  of  the  church 
among  large  numbers  of  the  nobility,  gentry,   Prospects  of 
and  peasantry.     Parliament  was  sure  of  a  few  the  combat- 
similar  adherents,  and  of  the  whole  of  the   a 
middle  classes  in  the  districts  which  held  to  them.     But  / 
there  was  this  important  difference.     The  Royal  causer 
centred  round  a  person,  the  Parliamentary  cause  round  a 
principle  little  understood  and  vaguely  enunciated.  Further, 
in  the  Parliamentary  cause  there  was  this  difficulty  —  what 
was  the  real  aim  of  the  war?     Was  Charles  to  be  beaten 
in  the  field  and  forced  to  terms,  or  pursued  and  punished? 
This  is  what  made  the  rebel  position  so  awkward.    There 
was  no  clear  understanding  of  the  object  of  the  war.    The 
vow  "to  live  and  die  in  defence  of  king  and  Parliament  " 
did  not  sound  a  very  thrilling  cry  when  those  who  uttered 
it  were  fighting  with  one  but  against  the  other.  The  king,  on  / 
the  other  hand,  had  a  clear  end  to  pursue,  the  conquest 
and  subjection  of  Parliament,  for  which  was  needed  only 
a  victorious  march  to  London. 

Thus  the  struggle  was  sure  to  develop  in  one  direction. 
The  king  must  attack,  and  the  rebels  must  defend,  the  * 
line  which  divided  their  respective  strong-  Nature  of  the 
holds.  Every  accession  of  territory  for  the  struggle. 
king  would  be  therefore  a  step  nearer  his  end,  but  for 
Parliament  attention  must  be  concentrated  on  defence. 
Even  if  they  beat  him  Charles  was  still  king,  and  no  one 
knew  on  what  terms  Parliament  would  lay  down  their 
arms.  This  course  of  action,  defence  by  Parliament  and 
attack  by  Charles,  was  made  even  more  necessary  by  the 
fact  that  the  former  had  no  reliable  permanent  force.  Too 
many  of  the  Parliament's  adherents  were  willing  to  fight  a 


42  EDGEHILL. 

campaign  with  the  clear  object  of  barring  the  king's  pro- 
gress to  London,  or  relieving  a  besieged  garrison;  but 
they  were  sure  to  flag  when  the  effort  was  over.  "  The 
Londoners,  as  is  their  miskent  custom,  after  a  piece  of 
service,  get  them  home,"  says  the  Scots  commissioner. 

Meanwhile  the  war  had  definitely  commenced,  with 
some  advantage  to  the  Parliamentarians.  Goring,  who 
Early  fighting  held  Portsmouth  for  the  king,  surrendered  it 
in  1642.  early  in  September,  and  thus  put  an  end  for 

the  present  to  any  hope  of  a  strong  southern  position  for 
the  Royalists.  The  Marquis  of  Hertford  had  been  placed 
by  Charles  in  command  of  his  forces  in  the  South-west, 
but  was  stoutly  resisted.  He  succeeded  in  getting  pos- 
session of  Shepton- Mallet,  but  was  besieged  on  taking 
post  at  Sherborne,  and  failed  to  make  any  stand  in  these 
parts.  He  went,  therefore,  into  Wales,  sending  his  lieu- 
tenant, Sir  Ralph  Hopton,  to  Cornwall. 

The  central  struggle  of  the  year  was  between  the  king 
and  the  main  Parliamentary  army  under  Essex.  The  latter 
Edgehiii.  assembled  at  Northampton  and  pressed  on 
Oct.  23, 1642.  towards  Nottingham,  where  Charles  had  but 
a  small  force.  The  king  determined  to  march  westward 
and  recruit  his  ranks  among  his  adherents  in  Wales.  On 
his  way  from  Shrewsbury  to  Chester  he  gained  large  re- 
inforcements. Essex  followed  and  occupied  Worcester, 
though  Prince  Rupert,  the  king's  nephew,  a  dashing,  reck- 
less cavalry  officer,  won  a  skirmish  at  Powick  Bridge,  in 
an  endeavour  to  save  it.  Having  at  last  gathered  a  host  of 
some  strength,  Charles  started  for  London  on  October  1 2. 
Essex  followed  and  came  up  with  him  on  the  slopes  of  Edge- 
hill,  not  far  from  Banbury.  The  Royal  forces  had  to  leave 
a  strong  position  on  Edgehiii  to  make  the  attack.  Rupert 
at  once  charged,  drove  the  enemy's  cavalry  before  him,  and 
pursued  them  for  five  miles,  leaving  the  king  to  fight  with 
infantry  only.  These  were  practically  without  leadership, 
for  the  king  possessed  courage  without  military  skill.  The 
Puritan  foot-soldiers  in  Essex's  army  behaved  splendidly, 
and  their  conduct  was  matched  by  that  of  the  king's 
"Red  Regiment".  Sir  Edmund  Verney  died  with  the 


THREE   ROYALIST  CENTRES.  43 

Royal  Standard  in  his  hands,  and  the  Earl  of  Lindsey, 
the  king's  general-in-chief,  was  taken  prisoner,  mortally 
wounded.  When  evening  came  the  Royalist  position  was  still 
maintained,  though  Rupert  returned  to  the  field  to  find  that 
his  reckless  pursuit  had  turned  a  victory  into  a  drawn  battle. 

Charles  had  so  far  the  best  of  the  encounter  that  he 
was  able  to  go  on  to  Oxford  after  taking  Banbury.  There 
had  been  some  conflict  in  Oxford,  where  the  The  march  to 
loyalty  of  the  University  was  not  shared  by  London, 
the  townsmen;  but  now  it  was  to  become  the  king's  chief 
stronghold  and  head-quarters  during  the  rest  of  the  war. 
The  way  to  London  was  open,  and  the  advance  began  in 
November.  The  citizens  expected  an  attack.  When 
Rupert  had  sacked  Brentford,  the  whole  militia  of  London 
marched  out  to  Turnham  Green  -  to  oppose  the  Royal 
army.  Charles,  not  inclined  to  risk  a  battle  with  25,000 
citizens  fighting  to  save  their  hearths  and  homes,  retired 
to  Reading,  and  finally  to  Oxford,  thus  throwing  away 
his  hopes  of  success. 

There  were  now  three  chief  gatherings  of  Royalist  forces, 
the  king's  head-quarters  at  Oxford,  Hopton's  Ro  alist 
small  force  in  Cornwall,  and  the  Northern  successes  till 
Royalists  under  Newcastle,  fighting  for  su-  Aueust- 16<3- 
premacy  in  Yorkshire.  These  three  centres  must  be 
separately  watched  during  the  next  campaigns. 

In  the  centre  there  were  many  small  encounters,  chiefly 
owing  to  the  endeavours  of  the  rebel  commanders  to  stop 
communication  between  various  Royal  forces.  jn  the  Mid- 
Essex  took  Reading,  and  established  himself  lands- 
on  the  east  side  of  Oxford,  where  he  was  attacked  by 
Rupert  and  his  cavalry.  The  engagement  at  Chalgrove 
Field  (June,  1643)  *s  chiefly  noteworthy  owing  to  the  death 
of  Hampden,  the  hero  of  the  old  dispute  about  the  Ship- 
money,  who  was  mortally  wounded  during  the  skirmish. 
The  Queen  landed  on  the  Yorkshire  coast  with  arms 
and  money  from  Holland,  and  the  Royalist  successes  in 
the  Midlands,  where  they  took  Tamworth,  Lichfield,  and 
many  other  towns,  enabled  her  to  get  in  safety  from  York 
to  Oxford. 

(962)  D 


44  COLONEL  OLIVER   CROMWELL. 

In  the  North  Newcastle  had  some  difficulty  in  holding 
his  own  against  Lord  Fairfax  and  his  son  Thomas,  York- 
Newcastle  in  shire  magnates  who  were  vigorous  for  Parlia- 
the  North.  rnent.  He  penetrated  as  far  as  Pontefract 
after  beating  Lord  Fairfax  at  Tadcaster.  As  Newark  was 
held  for  the  king  it  would  have  been  easy  for  him  now  to 
join  Charles,  but  he  preferred  to  turn  his  attention  to  the 
reduction  of  the  West  Riding.  His  advance  was  checked 
by  the  younger  Fairfax,  who  recovered  a  part  of  the  county 
for  Parliament.  This  was,  however,  retrieved  by  a  victory 
over  the  two  Fairfaxes  at  Adwalton  Moor  (June  30,  1643), 
which  once  more  turned  the  tide  in  the  North.  Hull 
alone  held  out  for  Parliament.  To  utilize  this  success  by 
an  attack  on  the  enemy's  forces  in  the  Eastern  counties 
was  Newcastle's  next  project.  This,  however,  was  not 
well  carried  out,  and  the  Eastern  Roundheads,  under 
Colonel  Oliver  Cromwell,  who  now  first  appears  on 
the  scene,  were  able  to  beat  the  Royalists  at  Gains- 
borough. Cromwell  came  of  an  old  Huntingdonshire 
family,  and  had  been  in  Parliament  as  early  as  1628. 
He  was  already  giving  proofs  of  those  qualities  which 
were  to  raise  him  to  the  foremost  place  in  England. 
While  others  hesitated  Cromwell  always  acted,  and  knew 
how  to  adapt  means  to  ends.  W7hile  so  many  in  Parlia- 
ment and  in  the  field  were  far  from  sure  as  to  their  aims 
and  methods,  this  man  of  clear  views  and  quick  action 
was  a  power  indeed.  To  common  sense  and  tact  he 
added  all  that  was  most  vigorous  in  Puritanism,  a  firm 
belief  in  Divine  guidance,  and  a  keen  sense  that  a  great 
cause  was  intrusted  to  him  and  his  "lovely  company", 
as  he  called  his  grim  Puritan  troopers. 

Meanwhile,  in  the  West  of  England,  the  king's  troops 
had  won  a  series  of  brilliant  victories.  Hopton,  assisted 
Hopton  in  by  the  local  gentry,  among  whom  the  Gren- 
the  West.  villes  were  conspicuous,  made  himself  master 
of  Cornwall.  He  won  a  clear  victory  at  Bradock  Down 
in  January,  and  was  then  confronted  by  Lord  Stamford, 
who  came  from  Wales  to  aid  the  Western  Roundheads. 
The  departure  of  Stamford  to  the  West  had  set  Hertford 


ROYALIST  VICTORIES.  45 

free  to  join  Charles  at  Oxford  with  his  Welsh  recruits,  and 
when  he  had  taken  Cirencester,  all  the  Severn  Valley, 
except  Gloucester,  was  in  Royalist  hands.  Sir  William 
Waller  was  now  sent  as  Parliamentary  general  to  the  West, 
and  by  his  "nimble  marches"  secured  Bristol,  Monmouth, 
and  Chepstow,  and  surprised  Hereford.  Meanwhile, 
Charles  was  writing  to  Hopton  in  Cornwall,  bidding  him 
push  on  to  Oxford.  Hopton  had  again  beaten  Stamford 
at  Stratton  and  "taken  in"  most  of  Devonshire.  This  had 
to  be  stopped,  and  Waller  came  from  Wales  for  the  pur- 
pose. It  was  no  light  task,  for  there  were  already  Royalist 
troops  at  Salisbury  ready  to  join  Hopton :  their  junction 
was  effected  at  Chard,  and  in  two  combined  attacks  on 
Waller  at  Lansdown  and  Roundway  Down  they  were 
completely  successful.  The  result  of  these  successes 
was  the  surrender  of  Bristol,  then,  and  for  long  after,  the 
second  city  in  the  kingdom. 

Thus  in  these  six  months  of  1643  there  had  been  an 
almost  uninterrupted  series  of  Royalist  victories.  With 
Newcastle  supreme  in  Yorkshire  and  Hopton  The  crisis, 
in  the  West  Charles  had  no  force  to  fear.  This  August,  1643. 
was  the  moment  for  striking  a  final  blow  on  his  enemies 
by  concentrating  all  his  forces  on  London.  But  it  was 
impossible.  Hopton  and  Newcastle  reported  that  their 
troops  "  utterly  refused  "  to  leave  their  homes  exposed  to 
attacks  from  rebel  garrisons.  Charles  himself  had  a 
"  miserable  army "  for  such  an  attempt,  and  the  chance 
was  abandoned  when  it  was  decided  to  attempt  the  siege 
of  Gloucester  instead  of  taking  advantage  of  the  dissen- 
sions in  London. 

There  had  indeed  been  during  this  period  a  growing 
desire  for  peace.    The  extreme  Puritan  party  had  no  part 
in  it,  but  the  Lords  and  the  City  of  London,     Treaty  of 
together  with  several  counties,  were  anxious  to    Oxford, 
send  terms  to  the  king.     The  Commons  had 
to  assent,  and  proposals  hardly  less  stringent  than  the 
Nineteen  Propositions  were  sent  to  Oxford  in  February, 
1643.     Charles  sent  counter   proposals,   demanding  re- 
storation of  ships,  forts,  and  revenue,  protection  for  the 


46  A    DRAWN    BATTLE. 

Prayer-book,  and  a  disclaimer  of  the  right  to  tax  and 
imprison.  There  was  no  hope  of  agreement,  though  the 
fruitless  negotiations  dragged  on  for  months. 

The  determination  of  the  king  to  besiege  Gloucester 
called  forth  an  enthusiasm  on  the  part  of  his  enemies  to 
First  Battle  reueve  ^-  Essex's  resolute  eight  days'  march 
of  Newbury.  with  8ooo  Londoners  through  a  hostile  country 
Sep.  20, 1643.  wag  one  Qf  ^  Boldest  strokes  of  the  whole 

war.  On  his  approach  Charles  abandoned  the  siege, 
intending  to  cut  off  the  enemy's  return  to  London.  After 
an  unsuccessful  attempt  to  outmanoeuvre  Essex  the 
Royalist  force  followed  him  in  the  direction  of  Newbury. 
The  Parliamentarians  had  taken  the  Kennet-valley  road 
to  London,  and  to  occupy  Newbury  was  the  only  chance 
of  barring  their  passage.  Essex  and  his  men  fought  their 
way  on  from  field  to  field  only  to  find  the  open  country 
stoutly  held.  Two  regiments  of  London  trained-bands 
resisted  the  shock  of  Rupert's  cavalry  and  behaved  "to 
wonder".  The  Royalists  lost  some  of  their  noblest. 
Lord  Falkland,  sickened  by  the  sights  and  sounds  of  civil 
war,  courted  and  found  death.  A  whole  day's  fighting 
left  the  Royal  position  still  unforced;  but  during  the 
night  the  king,  being  short  of  ammunition,  abandoned  his 
posts,  and  Essex  reached  Reading  in  safety.  The  year's 
fighting  was  brought  to  a  close  by  the  successes  of  Hop- 
ton,  who  led  his  Western  army  as  far  as  Arundel, 
Winchester  having  been  already  surprised,  and  Dart- 
mouth surrendered  to  Rupert's  brother  Maurice.  In  the 
eastern  counties  Lord  Manchester  had  been  placed  in 
command  by  the  Parliament,  and  his  second  in  command, 
Cromwell,  had  grasped  the  truth,  that  enthusiasm,  equal 
to  that  of  the  Cavalier  gentlemen,  could  only  be  secured 
by  enrolling  Puritans  who  would  fight  with  "a  spirit". 
His  new  levies  soon  proved  their  worth  by  defeating 
the  Royalist  cavalry  at  Winceby.  [October,  1643.] 

With  the  commencement  of  1644  two  important  changes 
Allies  on  must  be  noticed.  The  Scots  had  been  in- 
both  sides.  duced  to  send  a  force  into  England  on  the  Par- 
liamentary side,  and  Charles  had  made  a  treaty  with  the  Irish 


ENGLAND 

as  divided  between  the 

King1  and  the  Parliament 

at  the  end  of  1643. 


.-—"—•x^  -,  ^      ,- 

.Deitiic^Nottingh 
Shrewsbury  v      > — 

/-^LichfieH-^       GLeicest 


48  PURITANISM   DIVIDED. 

leaders,  by  which  he  had  already  obtained  an  increased 
force  and  hoped  for  more.  The  "  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant "  entered  into  by  the  Scots  and  the  Parliament 
in  September,  1 643,  was,  from  the  Scottish  point  of  view, 
an  alliance  for  the  establishment  of  Presbyterianism  in 
England,  but  the  English  looked  little  further  than  the 
assistance  they  were  likely  to  afford  in  the  war.  The 
Irish  "Cessation",  September,  1643,  was  a  twelve  months' 
truce  with  the  Catholics  in  Ireland,  which  would  enable 
Charles  to  bring  over  his  English  troops,  the  wrecks  of 
Strafford's  old  army,  and  use  them  against  Parliament. 

The  "  Solemn  League  and  Covenant "  was  Pym's  last 
triumph.     His  death  in  December,   1643,  removed  the 
great  leader  who  had  kept  a  majority  together      Death  of 
during  the  critical  days  of  religious  difference      pym- 
in  the  Long  Parliament,  and  who,  though  no  theologian, 
had  placed  the  Puritan  programme  in  the  van  of  the 
Parliamentary  position.     He  believed  in  Puritanism  as  a 
national  force. 

But  the  Westminster  Assembly,  where  a  settlement  of 
religion  was  now  being  debated,  was  beginning  to  show 
a  line  of  division  between  Presbyterians  and  Division  in 
Independents,  which  was,  later  on,  to  wreck  both  camps, 
the  cause  of  Puritanism  in  England.  Difficulties  were 
occurring  too  in  the  Royalist  camp.  There  were  quarrels 
among  the  commanders,  many  of  whom,  like  Prince 
Rupert  and  his  brother  Maurice,  objected  to  civilian 
influence  exercised  by  such  men  as  Hyde  and  Culpeper. 
Charles  had  gathered  a  counter  parliament  at  Oxford — 
his  "mongrel  Parliament",  as  he  called  it — which  also 
caused  trouble,  as  his  conduct  in  Irish  affairs  was  not 
popular  among  the  English  gentry.  But  it  gave  the  king's 
cause  a  great  show  of  legality,  as  it  included  more  than 
half  the  House  of  Lords,  and  a  third  of  the  Commons. 

Similar  contentions  were  arising  in  the  eastern  counties 
and  among  the  Parliamentary  commanders.  Essex  and 
Waller  were  jealous  of  each  other,  and  Cromwell  was 
anxious  to  bring  forward  in  the  army  the  Independent 
Puritan  elements  which  he  had  seen  to  be  of  such 


BALANCED   SUCCESS.  49 

splendid  fighting  quality.  Thus,  with  Irish  intrigues, 
military  dissensions,  and  religious  bitterness,  the  interven- 
tion of  the  Scots,  who  were  anxious  to  convert  England 
to  the  opinions  they  held  on  Presbyterianism,  only  threw 
one  more  question  on  the  table — the  "divine  right"  of 
presbyters  and  elders  to  rule  church  and  control  state. 

Early  in  1644  Hopton's  successes  received  a  rude  check 
by  his  defeat  at  Cheriton,  in  Hampshire.  Newark  was 
Dangers  in  a^so  m  danger,  and  there  were  indications  that 
the  North  and  Newcastle  would  be  hemmed  in  by  the  Scots 
centre.  1644.  from  the  North  and  by  Cromwell  from  the 

East.  The  loss  of  the  North  would  be  a  crushing  blow 
to  Charles,  who  was  unable  to  concentrate  his  forces  to 
relieve  Newcastle,  as  he  was  now  met  by  a  combination 
of  Essex  and  Waller.  They  approached  Oxford  at  the 
end  of  May.  Rupert  was  sent  with  the  best  of  the  king's 
troops  to  relieve  York,  into  which  Newcastle  had  retired, 
and  Charles  remained  in  the  Midlands  with  the  rest  of 
his  host  to  deal  with  his  two  foes. 

Fortunately  for  the  Royal  cause  Essex  and  Waller 
elected  to  act  separately,  and  the  former  went  south  to 
Royalist  sue-  re^eve  trie  ^ew  seaports  which  held  out  in 
cess  in  the  Devon  and  Dorset  from  local  assailants. 
Charles  had  now  to  fight  Waller,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  checking  him  at  the  engagement  of  Cropredy 
Bridge.  Waller's  troops  were  clamouring  to  get  home, 
and  thus  Charles  had  no  difficulty  in  marching  after 
Essex,  who  actually  retired  into  Cornwall  in  the  end  of 
July,  and  allowed  himself  to  be  hemmed  in  by  the  king. 
His  army  surrendered  at  Lostwithiel,  but  he  himself 
escaped  by  sea  to  Plymouth.  [September,  1644.] 

Meanwhile,  this  success  of  the  king  in  the  West  was 
more  than  balanced  by  the  entire  loss  of  the  North. 
LOSS  of  the  Here  the  Scots  had  joined  the  Fairfaxes  and 
North.  the  troops  of  the  Eastern  Association  under 

Manchester  and  Cromwell,  for  the  siege  of  York.  Rupert 
had  carried  all  before  him  till  he  outmanoeuvred  the 
Parliamentary  generals  and  reached  York.  Joining  New- 
castle's forces  he  advanced  close  to  the  enemy  on  the 


50  MONTROSE   FOR   THE   KING. 

slopes  of  Marston  Moor  on  the  evening  of  July  2.  The 
rebel  forces  at  once  attacked.  Cromwell's  cuirassiers  and 
Leslie's  dragoons  broke  up  Rupert's  cavalry,  though  Goring 
routed  Fairfax  on  the  other  wing,  and  the  Scots  in  the 
centre  were  terribly  pressed.  But  Cromwell  defeated 
Goring  as  he  returned  from  the  pursuit,  and  Leslie  suc- 
coured his  countrymen  in  the  centre.  Finally  the  Royalist 
infantry  fell  back,  and  a  complete  victory  for  the  rebels 
dealt  a  final  blow  to  the  king's  hopes  in  the  North.  But 
in  this  perplexing  war  local  struggles  were  raging  every- 
where. 

There  was  no  unanimity  even  in  Scotland.  The  Mar- 
quis of  Montrose,  who  was  opposed  to  the  idea  of  a 
Presbyterian  democracy,  placed  his  hopes  in  Montrose  in 
Charles;  and  with  the  astounding  belief  that  Scotland. 
Presbyterianism  on  an  aristocratic  basis  could  be  achieved 
for  England  and  Scotland  by  helping  the  Royalist  cause, 
he  now  raised  a  Highland  force  and  prepared  to  strike  a 
blow  for  the  king.  He  won  some  wonderful  victories, 
beginning  with  Tippermuir  in  September,  1644,  and  by 
the  middle  of  1645  his  successes  seemed  as  if  they  might 
have  a  serious  effect  on  the  ultimate  event  of  the  war. 

After  the  great  victory  of  Marston  Moor  there  is  no 
doubt  that  vigorous  action  on  the  part  of  Parliament 
might  have  gone  far  to  stop  hostilities  and  The  Parlia. 
bring  the  king  to  terms.  Charles  had  to  get  ment's 
back  from  the  West,  and  if  the  rebel  forces  chance- 
could  have  concentrated  rapidly  enough,  it  would  have 
been  possible  to  bar  his  passage  to  Oxford  and  pen  him 
in  the  western  peninsula.  The  army  of  Essex  was  dis- 
solved, but  Waller  was  sent  to  hold  Charles  in  check,  and 
Manchester  was  ordered  to  go  to  the  "West"  to  support 
him.  Manchester,  who  is  described  as  a  "sweet,  meek 
man  "  by  the  Scotchman  Baillie,  had  no  taste  for  crushing 
the  king  in  person;  while  Cromwell,  his  lieutenant,  the 
"darling  of  the  Sectaries",  felt  that  this  was  precisely  what 
was  wanted.  His  troopers,  who  fined  each  other  for 
swearing,  and  sang  their  psalms  before  throwing  them- 
selves on  the  Royalist  cavalry,  would  have  followed  him 


SECOND   BATTLE  OF  NEWBURY.  5  I 

against  an}-  foe,  spiritual  or  political.  The  result  was, 
that,  in  spite  of  the  necessity,  and  the  eagerness  of  some, 
Manchester  asked  for  a  definition  of  the  word  "  West ", 
and  delayed  to  co-operate  with  Waller.  This  was  fatal. 
Charles,  having  given  his  foes  time  by  waiting  for  levies, 
arrived  near  Xewbury  on  October  22,  1644.  Waller  had 
fallen  back  and  been  tardily  joined  by  Manchester  and 
Cromwell.  The  Parliamentary  cause  was  not  advanced 
by  the  action  of  the  "  Committee  of  Both  Kingdoms  ",  a 
body  in  whose  hands  military  matters  had  been  placed 
since  the  arrival  of  the  Scots  in  England.  They  gave 
orders  from  London,  and  instead  of  placing  one  man  in 
command  and  giving  him  a  general's  freedom  of  action, 
they  had  on  this  occasion  appointed  a  council  of  war  to 
manage  the  campaign.  The  result  was  shown  in  the  battle 
that  ensued  at  Newbury. 

The  Royal  forces  were  strongly  posted,  and  it  was  de- 
cided to  attack  them  in  the  rear  by  a  flank  movement. 
The  chance  is  ^  °  ma^e  success  certain  the  main  body  was 
lost.  Oct.  27,  to  divert  attention  by  attacking  the  Royal 
position  in  front.  A  party  under  Cromwell 
and  others  successfully  stormed  the  rear  of  the  king's 
position  at  Speen.  But  Manchester  hesitated  to  make 
the  attack  in  front,  and  when  he  finally  did  so,  late  in  the 
day,  he  was  repulsed.  Darkness  put  an  end  to  the  strug- 
gle, and  Charles's  forces  got  safely  away  towards  Oxford. 
The  prey  had  escaped. 

Both  sides  had  now  lost  a  great  opportunity,  and  both 
had  learnt  the  lesson.  Organized  forces  and  determined 
The  lessons  leaders  must  be  obtained  for  Parliament  if 
of  failure.  they  were  to  beat  the  king.  The  Royal 
forces  must  leave  Oxford  to  itself,  and  crush  their  foes  in 
detail,  as  they  could  not  yet  get  to  London. 

Meanwhile,  the  Parliament  had  begun  to  organize  the 
"  New  Model  Army  ",  a  permanent  Puritan  force,  which 
was  ready  early  in  1645.  The  "Self-denying  Ordinance" 
excluded  all  members  of  Lords  and  Commons  from  com- 
mand, and  left  military  power  in  the  hands  of  a  proved 
soldier,  the  younger  Fairfax. 


,2  PRESBYTERIANS  AND   INDEPENDENTS. 

Hand  in  hand  with  this  reform  came  the  execution  of 
Archbishop  Laud  (June  10,  1645),  and  the  further  sever- 
ance of  Presbyterians  from  Independents.  Religious 
The  latter  wished  for  toleration  and  state  divisions. 
supremacy  over  the  church,  the  former  for  the  systematic 
enforcement  of  Presbyterian  methods  and  no  state  inter- 
ference. The  Independents  believed  in  themselves,  while 
the  Presbyterians  believed  in  a  system  of  church  govern- 
ment. There  was  a  weighty  third  party,  at  whose  head 
was  the  great  lawyer  Selden,  which  dissented  from  the 
extreme  views  of  both  Independents  and  Presbyterians, 
and  meant  to  uphold  state  control  over  both.  Yet  the 
growth  of  the  Independent  party  was  on  the  whole  steady. 
The  Scots  were  keenly  averse  to  this  new  form  of  Puritan- 
ism, and  began  to  hope  for  something  from  Charles; 
hence  the  fruitless  negotiations  which  took  place  at  Ux- 
bridge  in  January,  1645.  The  Independents  smiled  and 
went  on  with  the  New  Model. 

In  the  spring  of  1645  Rupert  went  to  Wales  to  recruit, 
and  hoped  to  be  joined  by  Charles.  The  two  would 
attack  the  Scots,  who  had  been  obliged  to  The  king's 
send  large  forces  to  the  North,  where  Mon-  Plan 
trose  was  wasting  Argyleshire.  Cromwell,  with  a  handful 
of  cavalry,  made  a  dashing  raid  round  Oxford,  and  carried 
off  'the  horses,  without  which  no  guns  could  leave  the 
Royal  head-quarters.  By  this  time  the  New  Model  was 
ready,  and  though  Rupert  had  joined  the  king,  Fairfax 
was  ordered  to  relieve  Taunton.  This  was  a  mistake,  for 
it  left  Charles  free  to  fight  the  Scots.  While  he  was  en- 
deavouring to  find  them,  Fairfax,  abandoning  the  relief 
of  Taunton,  came  back  to  besiege  Oxford.  If  the  place 
had  been  stronger  the  king  might  have  beaten  the  Scots  and 
joined  Montrose,  who  was  carrying  all  before  him.  But 
Charles,  after  sacking  Leicester  (May  31),  feared  to  go 
too  far  from  his  southern  stronghold,  and  Fairfax  was 
therefore  able  to  bring  him  to  battle.  Charles  was  at 
Daventry,  and  the  Royalists  neither  knew  nor  Naseby. 
cared  anything  about  the  New  Model  army.  June  J4>  rf*s 
The  despised  Parliamentary  forces  surprised  the  king  near 


THE  ROYAL  CAUSE   FALLING.  53 

the  village  of  Naseby  on  June  14.  Again  Rupert  dashed 
off  the  field  after  making  a  brilliant  charge.  Cromwell 
and  his  troopers  were  thus  enabled  to  turn  the  scale  in 
favour  of  the  Parliamentary  infantry,  and  the  king's  army 
was  completely  beaten  and  its  infantry  cut  to  pieces. 

Charles's  cause  was  now  almost  hopeless.  Enthusiasm 
and  organization  were  on  the  side  of  his  enemies.  Their 
Failure  of  the  quarrels  were  laid  aside,  and  the  real  victory 
Royal  cause,  rested  with  the  Independents.  The  Royal 
intrigues  with  the  Irish  and  with  foreign  powers  had  been 
discovered  by  the  capture  of  the  king's  cabinet  at  Naseby, 
and  proofs  of  his  machinations  were  on  view  in  London 
to  convince  doubters.  His  commanders  were  quarrelling, 
or,  like  Goring,  drinking  away  his  cause  in  the  West. 

The  real  weakness  of  the  king's  position  was  that  he 
was  safe  nowhere.  His  foes  now  realized  that  he  must  be 
Pariiamentar  cl°sety  followed  and  prevented  from  raising 
victories  in  the  another  army.  He  was  in  Wales  in  July, 
west.  i645.  t)ut  the  gCQts  were  makmg  jt  untenable,  and 

the  king's  hope  was  in  a  junction  with  his  western  forces. 
In  the  West,  however,  the  New  Model,  after  its  victory  in 
the  Midlands,  was  engaged  in  a  brilliant  campaign  which 
made  Parliament  masters  of  the  Devonian  peninsula. 
After  Fairfax's  victories  at  Langport  and  Bridgewater  in 
July  the  only  ray  of  hope  was  in  the  North.  Montrose 
had  beaten  the  forces  sent  against  him  in  two  brilliant 
actions  at  Auldearn  and  Alford.  But  his  Highlanders, 
like  the  troops  of  Essex  and  Waller,  after  a  success  "got 
them  home"  to  stow  away  their  booty. 

Still,  if  Montrose  could  not  come  south,  Charles  might 
join  him  in  the  North.  With  this  object  the  king  assem- 
The  king's  bled  the  Yorkshire  gentry  at  Doncaster  only 
last  hope.  to  fin(j  himself  hotly  pursued  by  Colonel 
Poyntz  and  the  Scottish  cavalry  under  David  Leslie, 
though  the  latter  was  soon  recalled  to  Scotland  to  face 
Montrose,  who  had  just  defeated  Baillie  at  Kilsyth.  Any 
hope  of  getting  to  Scotland  was  spoiled  by  the  wariness 
of  Poyntz,  and  the  king  was  again  obliged  to  make  for 
Oxford. 


54  CHARLES   GOES  TO  THE  SCOTS. 

His  marches  during  these  months  are  well  described 
by  Clarendon  as  "perpetual  motion".  Leaving  Oxford 
on  August  30  he  managed  to  relieve  Hereford  A  Royal 
from  the  Scots,  but  his  recruiting  ground  was  fugitive. 
now  worked  out,  and  no  forces  were  available  for  the 
relief  of  Bristol,  which  Fairfax  was  now  besieging.  Again 
the  fugitive  king  wandered  aimlessly  northwards,  only  to 
see  his  troops  defeated  by  his  pursuer  near  Chester,  on 
Rowton  Heath  (Sept.  24).  From  Newark,  he  might  still 
reach  Montrose.  But  that  brilliant  adventurer  had  just 
been  beaten  and  ruined,  after  a  year  of  unprecedented 
victory,  by  David  Leslie  at  the  surprise  of  Philiphaugh. 
Bristol  was  stormed  and  surrendered  on  September  10 
by  Rupert,  who  had  no  liking  for  a  failing  cause.  When 
Charles,  beaten  and  low-spirited,  once  more  reached 
Oxford  in  October,  his  position  in  the  Midlands  had 
become  untenable  owing  to  the  activity  of  the  Parliamen- 
tary generals.  The  next  few  months  were  occupied  by 
Cromwell  and  Fairfax  in  the  complete  subjugation  of  the 
West.  Hopton  made  a  gallant  stand,  but  all  was  lost 
early  in  1646.  Chester  had  surrendered,  Newark  was 
invested  by  the  Scots,  and  South  Wales  was  all  but  lost. 

Such  hope  as  the  king  now  had  rested  on  a  treaty  with 
the  Scots  army.  This  was  possible  owing  to  the  disgust 
of  the  Northerners  at  the  failure  of  their  Fughtofthe 
hopes  for  the  conversion  of  England  to  kine-  Mav  l6*6- 
Presbyterianism,  and  at  the  complete  success  of  the 
Independents  in  the  army  of  Cromwell  and  Fairfax. 
French  diplomacy  was  used  to  create  a  superficial  agree- 
ment between  Charles  and  the  Scots,  consisting  of  a 
verbal  treaty  in  which  neither  party  said  what  they  meant. 
The  result  was  that  the  king  left  Oxford  in  May,  1646,  to 
take  refuge  in  the  Scots  camp  outside  Newark.  With 
the  capitulation  of  Oxford  on  June  24  the  civil  war  was 
ended.  The  Scottish  forces  retired  to  Newcastle  with  the 
king  practically  a  prisoner  in  their  camp.  His  position 
was  the  result  of  a  resolve  to  try  and  get  the  help  of  their 
swords  without  giving  them  what  they  required  in  return, 
namely,  a  definite  pledge  for  Presbyterianism  in  England. 


SCOTS   LEAVE   ENGLAND.  55 

They  never  intended  to  take  less,  and  he  never  meant  to 
grant  as  much. 

In  fact,  the  situation  had  now  changed.  Intrigue  took 
the  place  of  war.  There  were  three  clear  parties :  first, 
Altered  char-  ^e  Scots,  anxious  to  make  England  Presby- 
acterofthe  terian;  secondly,  the  army  of  the  Parliament 
situation.  flushed  with  victory,  and  hating  the  Scots  as 
much  as  the  Scots  hated  bishops;  lastly,  the  English 
Parliament  itself,  where  there  were  many  moderate  men 
in  favour  of  a  compromise,  and  as  yet  a  decided  majority 
for  Presbyterianism.  Charles's  object  for  the  next  few 
years  was  to  play  with  these  three  forces  in  order  to 
secure  his  own  ends,  while  each  party  was  willing  to 
treat  with  him,  also  for  its  own  ends.  This  explains  the 
constant  attempts  of  the  various  parties  to  secure  the 
king's  person  and  so  gain  his  ear. 

The  Scots,  who  held  the  prize,  now  combined  with 
Parliament  to  offer  the  so-called  "Newcastle  Proposi- 
Newcastie  tions".  The  Parliament  was  perfectly  aware 
Propositions,  of  the  Scots'  intrigue,  in  spite  of  their  auda- 
juiy,  1646.  cious  denial  of  all  knowledge  of  the  king's 
intended  journey  to  their  camp.  Yet,  fearing  the  Inde- 
pendents, the  majority  at  Westminster  concurred  in 
pressing  the  treaty,  by  which  Charles  was  asked  to  take 
the  Covenant,  abolish  Episcopacy,  and  resign  the  control 
of  militia  to  Parliament  for  twenty  years.  The  king's 
attitude  was  disappointing.  Instead  "of  refusing  manfully, 
he  spoke  of  discussion.  The  Queen,  wiser  in  her  genera- 
tion, wished  him  to  yield,  with  the  hope  of  getting  back 
his  power  gradually.  Finally  he  suggested  a  compromise, 
which  was  refused,  and  the  Scots  decided  to  leave  Eng- 
land. Their  arrears  were  paid  by  Parliament,  and  the 
king  was  handed  over  to  English  commissioners,  who 
took  him  to  Holmby  House,  in  Northamptonshire, 
February,  1647. 

He  at  once  renewed  his  negotiations  with  the  English 
Presbyterians,  who  were  more  moderate  than  the  Scots. 
Their  main  wish  was  to  get  rid  of  the  army,  and  they 
were  now  proposing  to  send  some  regiments  to  Ireland, 


56  ARMY   QUARRELS  WITH    PARLIAMENT. 

and  disband  others.  This  led  to  a  most  important  move- 
ment, for  the  army  had  long  been  growing  into  a  political 
force,  and  at  once  organized  itself  to  resist  Parliament 
extinction  at  the  hands  of  a  Presbyterian  versus 
Parliament.  Each  troop  elected  a  represen- 
tative, and  these  chose  two  "Agitators"  for  each  regiment. 
The  army  was  disgusted  at  the  discovery  that  Parliament 
was  not  only  scheming  to  dissolve  it,  but  also  concocting 
an  arrangement  with  the  king  in  the  Presbyterian  interest. 
And  so  Cromwell  and  the  officers,  who  had  not  yet  sided 
with  the  army  against  Parliament,  contrived  to  arrange 
the  seizure  of  Charles  by  Cornet  Joyce.  He  was  taken 
to  Newmarket,  and  there  kept  up  the  feud  between  his 
enemies  by  complaining  to  Parliament  of  his  unlawful 
seizure  by  the  army.  The  two  forces,  military  and  civil, 
were  now  at  open  strife.  The  Commons  were  known  to 
be  relying  on  the  London  trained -bands,  and  the  army 
promptly  issued  its  famous  manifesto,  in  which  the  leaders 
declared  they  would  march  on  the  city  to  satisfy  their 
"just  demands".  The  trained-bands  were  called  out, 
but  the  army  shrank  from  bloodshed,  and  the  manifesto, 
on  being  handed  to  Parliament,  was  found  to  contain  a 
demand  for  a  dissolution,  and  short  Parliaments,  in 
which  we  can  trace  the  idea  of  sovereignty  of  the  people. 
Another  peremptory  request  was  for  the  expulsion  of 
eleven  Presbyterian  members  who  had  been  instrumental 
in  the  late  negotiations  with  the  king.  These  prudently 
fled,  but  the  Commons  resolved  that  the  army  should 
not  come  within  25  miles  of  London.  The  flight  of 
the  leading  Presbyterians  made  Parliament  more  inclined 
to  come  to  terms  with  the  army,  but  the  city  was  still  in 
favour  of  accepting  a  compromise  with  Charles,  and 
many  of  the  Independent  members  took  refuge  from  mob 
violence  in  the  army. 

This  gave  Fairfax  an  excuse  for  marching  on  London, 
which  he  did  in  August,  1647,  to  restore  these  The  march 
members.     Meanwhile  Cromwell  and  Fairfax   on  London, 
had   themselves   been   endeavouring   to  come   to  some 
terms  with  the  king.     But  the  extreme  democratic  party 


ORIGIN    OF   THE  SECOND   CIVIL  WAR.  57 

in  the  army,  led  by  the  "Agitators",  was  for  a  more 
complete  change,  including  manhood  suffrage  and  avowed 
popular  sovereignty.  Thus  the  king  had  a  threefold 
choice,  to  side  with  the  moderate  Presbyterians,  to  accept 
the  moderate  army  proposals,  or  to  succumb  to  the 
thorough-paced  democracy  of  the  "  levelling  "  party. 

At  first  he  refused  to  accept  any  overtures  from  the 
Independents,  but  subsequently  he  endeavoured  to  keep 
A  split  in  the  his  foes  divided  by  telling  Parliament  that  he 
army.  preferred  the  army  proposals,  and  wished  to 

consider  them.  The  army  was  now  thoroughly  divided, 
and  the  influence  of  the  extreme  party  was  sufficient  to 
raise  a  storm  against  Cromwell,  who  was  spoken  of  as 
"Judas".  A  mutiny  occurred  and  was  suppressed  by 
the  leaders,  but  it  was  becoming  clear  that  the  Agitators 
must  be  reckoned  with.  They  were  already  speaking  of 
justice  on  the  "  man  of  blood ",  and  Charles  began  to 
fear  for  his  safety.  In  November,  1647,  ne  escaped  to 
the  Isle  of  Wight,  still  putting  his  main  trust  in  increasing 
the  conflicts  of  his  enemies.  His  rejection,  however,  of 
the  "  Four  Bills  ",  in  which  he  was  asked  to  give  security 
for  Parliament's  independence  and  control  over  the  Militia,  \ 
at  last  induced  the  army  and  Parliament  to  forget  their 
differences  and  combine  against  him.  The  vote  for  dis- 
continuing further  "  Addresses  "  to  the  king  was  passed 
in  January,  1648. 

It  was  now  clear  to  Cromwell  that  no  hope  remained 
Difficulties  of  ot  commg  to  terms  with  Charles.     But  how 
the  army        to  arrange  any  future  agreement  between  army 
fanatics,  moderate  Republicans,  and  Indepen- 
dents was  not  so  clear. 

For  Charles  one  card  remained  to  play.  The  Scots 
had  not  ceased  to  ply  him  with  promises,  and  he  now 
Charles  turns  signed  an  agreement,  known  as  the  "Engage- 
to  the  Scots,  ment ",  by  which  the  Scots  pledged  them- 
>ec.  26, 1647.  sejves  to  restore  him  to  power  in  return  for 
concessions  to  Presbyterianism  in  England.  This  last 
proof  of  duplicity  led  to  the  Second  Civil  War,  which 
broke  out  at  once. 


58  A  SCOTTISH   INVASION. 

The  English  rising  came  first;  the  scattered  survivors 
of  the  Royalist  party  took  arms  on  all  sides,  but  they 
were  badly  organized,  and   there  was  little   second  civil 
difficulty  in  repressing  them.     Cromwell  had  war-   l6<8- 
a  campaign  in  South  Wales,  and  Fairfax  crushed  risings 
at  Maidstone  and  Colchester.     The  Prince  of  Wales,  to 
whom  a  portion  of  the  fleet  had  turned,  threatened  the 
capital,  but  was  compelled  to  retire  for  lack  of  provisions. 
Somewhat  strangely,  no  enthusiasm  was  called  forth  in 
London,  and  the  city  shut  its  gates  on  the  Royalist  forces. 

The  Scots  gave  more  trouble.  Their  kingdom  was 
divided  into  two  parties :  the  extreme  Presbyterians  under 
Argyle  would  have  no  hand  in  the  rising  unless  Charles 
took  the  Covenant  and  forswore  Bishops  and  Prayer- 
book.  The  more  moderate  party,  with  whom  the  majority 
of  the  nobility  sided,  were  opposed  to  all  extreme  cleri- 
calism, and  were  willing  to  fight  on  Charles's  moderate 
promises.  Unfortunately  their  leader  was  the  incapable 
Hamilton.  Though  only  partially  supported  he  advanced 
into  England  in  July.  There  he  was  soon  to  meet  Crom- 
well, who  had  done  his  work  in  Wales  and  was  ready  to 
oppose  the  Northern  host.  The  Scottish  forces  were  sur- 
prised before  they  could  join  the  English  royalists  in 
North  Wales.  Their  English  contingent  was  caught  and 
conquered  at  Preston  (August  17,  1648).  The  Scottish 
army  decamped  towards  the  South,  and  Cromwell  fol- 
lowed in  pursuit  through  Wigan,  taking  10,000  prisoners, 
some  of  whom  were  sent  home,  while  others  were  sent  as 
slaves  to  the  West  Indies.  Hamilton  capitulated,  and 
the  campaign  was  over. 

When  the  war  was  finished  there  was  a  marked  change. 
The  party  of  moderate  Presbyterianism  in  London  had 
again  the  upper  hand,  and  was  able  to  send    Resultofthe 
terms  to  Charles  at  Newport.     But  the  king    war  in 
only  replied  by  offering  a  very  trifling  part  of   Eneland- 
what  was  asked.      In  the'  army,  however,  there  was  a 
much  stronger  feeling  that  negotiation  must  cease  and 
justice  begin.     He  who  had  caused  the  second  war  must 
be  punished  now  that  it  was  safely  ended.     Cromwell 


DEATH  OF  CHARLES  I.  59 

had  written  from  Preston  about  "destroying  those  who 
trouble  the  land".  After  sending  an  ultimatum  to  the 
king  at  Newport  on  Nov.  16,  the  Army  Council  asked  for 
vParliament's  concurrence  in  their  "  Remonstrance ",  in 
which  the  establishment  of  democracy  and  the  trial  of 
the  king  were  urged.  This  was  neglected  by  the  Parlia- 
ment, and  the  army  was  exasperated  into  declaring  that 
Parliament  had  broken  its  trust  and  it  was  the  duty  of 
the  army  to  put  a  stop  to  such  proceedings.  "  Pride's 
Purge",  the  ejection  of  the  obstinate  members  by  Col. 
Pride  on  December  6,  left  Parliament  a  tool  in  the  hands 
of  the  army.  Charles  had  already  been  seized  by  com- 
mand of  the  officers  and  conveyed  to  Hurst  Castle  on 
the  Hampshire  coast:  there  was  now  no  further  question 
about  bringing  him  to  London  for  trial.  The  Commons 
passed  an  Ordinance  for  trying  the  king  on  January  i, 
1649,  and  when  the  Lords  refused  it  the  Lower  House 
further  declared  that  as  the  people  are  the  real  source 
of  power  the  House  of  Commons  might  make  laws  alone. 
A  High  Court  of  Justice  was  then  nominated,  but  less 
than  half  of  those  originally  nominated  to  it  sat  to  try  the 
king  in  Westminster  Hall. 

Legally  there  was  no  justification  for  such  a  course,  as 
no  process  can  issue  against  the  sovereign.  The  justifi- 
Triai  and  cation  must  be  sought  in  moral  and  political 
death  of  the  grounds.  For  us  it  is  enough  to  note  that 
the  prisoner  was  charged  with  carrying  on  "a 
wicked  and  tyrannical  power,  according  to  his  own  will ", 
instead  of  that  "limited  authority"  with  which  he  was 
intrusted  by  the  nation  and  laws.  Thus  was  raised  in 
its  greatest  and  most  terrible  form  the  question  of  sove- 
reignty which  had  already  caused  so  much  bloodshed. 
But  thus  it  found  no  satisfactory  answer.  The  king's 
reply,  completely  convincing  according  to  the  old  consti- 
tution, and  the  letter  of  the  law,  was  a  restatement  of  his 
superiority  to  law  and  a  criticism  of  the  illegality  and 
partisan  character  of  the  court.  He  was  condemned,  and 
beheaded  at  Whitehall  on  January  30,  1649,  meeting  his 
fate  with  a  dignity  and  resignation  which  moved  the 

(962)  E 


60  ENGLAND  WITHOUT  A  GOVERNMENT. 

hearts  even  of  his  enemies.  In  the  compassion  which 
was  felt  for  his  bloody  end  it  was  forgotten  by  most  men 
that  he  had  brought  his  fate  on  himself,  by  his  persistent 
machinations  against  his  captors  and  his  reckless  stirring 
up  of  the  Second  Civil  War.  If  he  had  kept  quiet  in  his 
captivity  he  would  never  have  come  to  the  scaffold. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE   COMMONWEALTH.       1649 — 1660. 

During  the  next  ten  years  England  was  practically 
without  a  Constitution.  One  strong  man,  with  a  military 
force  behind  him,  gained  the  power  and  kept  character  of 
order  amid  ever-increasing  difficulties.  Crom-  the  Period, 
well  aimed  at  a  settlement  which  should  establish  peace, 
toleration,  order,  and  commerce;  but  he  failed  to  secure 
them  more  than  temporarily,  even  by  the  sword.  The 
reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  As  England  then  was,  the  task 
was  impossible.  It  was  a  political  chaos.  The  nation 
was  split  into  two  hostile  camps,  and  these  again  into 
many  sections  and  shades  of  religious  and  political  opinion. 
A  constable  to  keep  the  pe.ace  till  the  ground-works  of 
law  and  order  should  be  relaid  was  required.  Cromwell 
achieved  this  and  no  more,  in  spite  of  brilliant  foreign 
policy  and  firm  suppression  of  disorder.  He  never  gained 
the  heart  of  the  nation.  He  would  succumb  to  no  party, 
and  no  party  was  willing  to  sink  its  own  opinions  in  order 
to  secure  the  benefits  which  he  was  able  to  confer  upon 
the  country.  He  found  and  brought  no  unity. 

The  Army  and  the  "  Rump"  (as  the  sixty  Independent 
members  who  formed  the  remnant  of  the  purged  Parlia- 
ment were  named)  were  now  supreme.  But  A 

.  .  ...  A  Provisional 

this  supremacy  was  not  likely  to  produce  a  government, 
peaceful  settlement.     The  Army  leaders  were  l649' 
not  unwilling  to  work  with  the  mutilated  assembly,  but  the 
"  Agitators  "  and  their  programme  had  still  to  be  reckoned 


CROMWELL  IN   IRELAND.  6 1 

with.  A  scheme  brought  before  Parliament  on  January 
20,  entitled  "The  Agreement  of  the  People",  explained*-^ 
their  views  in  favour  of  a  complete  democracy.  Frequent 
Parliaments,  truly  representing  the  "people",  should  carry 
out  the  national  will.  But  the  programme  of  these  Extrem- 
ists was  not  adopted.  After  Kingship  and  the  House 
of  Lords  had  been  abolished,Ai  Council  of  State  was 
appointed  in  February,  with  authority  from  Par^ament  to 
carry  on  the  entire  government  of  the  countr^  There 
was  much  talk  of  the  responsibility  of  this  council  to 
Parliament,  and  of  the  future  free  and  equally  distributed 
representation  of  the  people;  but  in  talk  it  stopped.  The 
discontent  which  the  "  Levellers  "  thereon  manifested  was 
pitilessly  crushed  by  Cromwell,  and  a  rising  of  the  more 
hot-headed  spirits  led  to  no  result  but  the  discredit  of 
their  cause. 

There  was  thus  a  provisional  government  with  every- 
thing to  settle.     But  for  the  present  the  Republic  had  to 
Threefold        make  good  its  position  against  a  threefold 
Royalist         opposition.     In  Ireland  there  had  existed  for 
on-      eight  years  a  formidable  rebellion.      If  partly 
religious  (for  the  Catholics  of  English  blood  were  not  given 
any  toleration),  it  was  still   more  national.     The   Irish 
Romanists  were  demanding,  as  always,  supre- 

In  Ireland.  .          ..         °'         .        ,J   '    T  r 

macy  and  separation  from  England.  Hence 
came  the  failure  of  the  loyal  and  high-hearted  Ormond  to 
combine  the  elements  of  the  rising  into  a  Royalist  move- 
ment. In  the  autumn  of  1649  Cromwell  came  over  and 
sacked  the  towns  of  Drogheda  and  Wexford,  massacring 
their  garrisons  with  pitiless  severity.  His  allegation  was 
that  slaughter,  after  due  warning,  would  end  opposition, 
and  so  be  merciful.  The  struggle  speedily  showed  its  true 
character  to  be  one  of  race :  the  English  Catholics  deserted 
Ormond  and  Royalism  was  crushed.  The  subjugation  of 
Ireland  went  on  under  Ireton;  English  colonists  were  in- 
troduced and  the  natives  driven  behind  the 
line  of  the  Shannon.  Cromwell  was  next  called 
to  Scotland,  where  more  work  awaited  him.  After  Ha- 
milton's defeat  the  extreme  Presbyterian  party  was  in 


62  PRINCE  CHARLES  AND  SCOTLAND. 

power.  But  they  had  no  wish  to  see  England  a  Republic 
with  Independency  triumphant.  Nor  had  they  any  sym- 
pathy with  the  execution  of  the  king.  They  still  hoped 
to  obtain  from  the  Prince  of  Wales  the  concessions  which 
they  had  failed  to  wring  from  his  father  at  Newcastle. 
Charles  II.  had  been  proclaimed  in  Edinburgh  on  his 
father's  execution,  but  did  not  go  to  Scotland  until  after 
the  failure  of  the  Irish  rising.  He  swallowed  the  Cove- 
nant graciously  enough,  and  the  Scottish  rising  became  a 
fact.  In  a  skilful  campaign,  which  ended  with  the  decisive 
victory  of  Dunbar  (September  3,  1650),  Cromwell  stifled 
once  more  the  hopes  of  Presbyterian  Royalism.  But 
while  he  was  further  settling  the  country,  a  strong  wave  of 
Royalism  rose  behind  him.  Hamilton  and  Montrose  had 
been  executed  as  traitors  to  their  country  and  the  Cove- 
nant, but  an  army  of  their  adherents  marched  into  Eng- 
land with  Charles  at  their  head  in  August,  1651.  Crom- 
well rapidly  followed,  and  at  Worcester,  his  "  Crowning 
Mercy",  routed  this  force  on  September  3.  Prince  Charles 
escaped  to  France  after  a  thousand  adventures,  and  the 
opposition  in  England  was  crushed.  Only  at  sea  did  the 
Royalists  under  Prince  Rupert  succeed  in  giving  the  navy 
of  the  young  Republic  considerable  work;  for  Royalist 
piracy,  with  centres  in  Scilly  and  the  Channel  Islands, 
continued  to  menace  the  trade  of  the  country  for  some 
time. 

Thus,  with  a  threefold  victory  at  home  the  new  govern- 
ment opened  its  career.  It  was  not  long  before  foreign 
War  with  the  affairs  called  for  action.  Jealousy  of  Dutch 
Dutch.  1652.  commercial  enterprise  led  to  the  passing  of 
the  "Navigation  Act"  in  1651.  This  aimed  at  securing  for 
English  ships  and  English  capital  the  lucrative  carrying- 
trade  by  which  the  Dutch  made  large  profits  out  of  Eng- 
land's commerce.  Henceforth  no  ship  was  to  land  goods 
in  English  ports  unless  she  were  English  made  and  manned, 
or  belonged  to  the  country  whose  products  she  was  bring- 
ing over.  This  was  to  apply  the  economic  doctrine  of 
"  protection  "  to  the  creation  of  a  merchant  navy.  The 
Dutch  were  naturally  angry,  and  a  collision  occurred  be- 


CROMWELL   SUPREME.  63 

tween  the  English  admiral  Blake  and  the  celebrated  Van 
Tromp,  which  led  to  a  declaration  of  war  in  July,  1652. 
The  English  navy  was  ably  organized,  and  there  was  fre- 
quent and  victorious  righting  in  the  Channel. 

But  in  spite  of  this  successful  outset  the  new  govern- 
ment was  experiencing  grave  troubles  at  home.  The 
party  of  progress  and  reform  in  the  army,  Renewed 
/though  baulked  of  its  dearest  aims,  did  not  %£™m°*t 
V  cease  to  advocate  changes;  and  the  old  feud  and  Army, 
between  Arrny  and  Parliament  was  always  threatening  to 
break  out.  \~ Cromwell  and  his  council  of  officers  were 
willing  to  seVsome  reforms  carried  out,  while  the  "  Rump" 
did  not  hesitate  tcrolaim  the  full  sovereignty  of  the  unmu- 
tilated  Parliament-*  It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  such 
antagonistic  principles  would  long  work  in  harmony. 
When  in  November,  1651,  the  "  Rump"  consented  to  dis- 
solve itself,  but  not  till  three  years  should  have  passed, 
the  Army  grew  wondrous  impatient.  The  introduction  in 
the  spring  of  1653  of  a  bill  for  making  the  "Rump"  a  per- 
petual Parliament,  with  a  veto  on  future  elections,  brought 
matters  to  a  crisis.  Th  e  officers  were  "necessi-  Crornwen 
tated,  though  with  much  reluctaney,  to  put  dissolves  the 
an  end  to  this  Parliament".  Everyone  knows  '  umP"- 
how  Cromwell  entered  the  House  at  the  head  of  his 
musketeers,  forcibly  evicted  the  recalcitrant  members, 
and  bade  his  myrmidons  "remove  that  bauble",  the 
Speaker's  mace.  The  Army,  though  as  usual  disclaiming 
any  desire  to  interfere  with  civil  affairs,  had  once  more 
interfered.  This  was  considered  by  the  Council  of  State 
a  menace  to  all  government,  and  its  members  forthwith 
dissolved  their  body.  The  Lord-general  and  his  officers 
now  stood  alone,  and  England  was  without  a  government. 
The  appointment  of  a  fresh  Council  of  State,  in  which  the 
officers  and  their  chief  placed  a  large  majority  of  their 
own  body,  was  only  a  temporary  expedient.<^To  Crom- 
well it  seemed  that  England  could  be  kept  in  order  by  the 
sword,  aided  by  a  few  local  and  central  officials  who 
would  continue  to  act  as  if  Parliament  were  sitting.  But 
there  were  many  opponents  watching  Cromwell.  The 


64        THE  INSTRUMENT  OF  GOVERNMENT. 

"  Saints  ",  as  the  extreme  Independents  were  called,  were 
claiming  to  rule  the  earth.  The  true  Republicans,  who 
The  new  Con-  tnougnt  Saints  should  be  modest  and  wait  till 
stitutionai  the  kingdom  was  given  them,  were  anxious  for 
a  settled  free  government  by  and  for  the  people 
— "  government  by  consent",  as  they  called  it.  To  neither 
of  these  views  could  Cromwell  subscribe :  his  answer  was 
complete.  "  Where,"  he  asked,  "  shall  we  find  the  consent? 
Amongst  the  Prelatical,  Presbyterian,  Independent,  Ana- 
baptist, or  Levelling  parties?"  This  is  the  key  to  his 
position.  A  free  Parliament  he  would  not  allow,  for  a 
free  Parliament  meant  Royalty,  and  the  nation  finally 
refused  to  take  anything  less. 

For  the  moment,  however,  he  thought  it  wise  to  allow 
the  "Saints"  to  try  their  hand.  A  body  of  nominees, 
First  attempt  mainly  chosen  by  the  Independent  ministers, 
to  solve  it.  was  summoned,  to  the  number  of  144.  To 
them  Cromwell  committed  the  affairs  of  the  kingdom. 
They  began  to  reform  and  abolish  with  vigour,  and  finally, 
in  their  zeal,  threatened  to  upset  the  institution  of  private 
property  by  attacking  tithes  and  patronage.  Their  assem- 
bly, which  is  known  as  "  Barebones  Parliament ",  because 
one  of  its  prominent  members  bore  that  extraordinary 
name,  resigned  its  power  in  December,  1653. 

The  army  leaders  under  Lambert  now  proposed  to  make 
Cromwell  "  Lord  Protector  ",  with  a  council  and  a  Parlia- 
The  "  instru-  ment  in  due  form.  The  Proposal  was  drawn 
Smber'  i£e~  UP  in  tne  "  Instrument  of  Government ".  It 
1653-  was  a  new  kind  of  constitution,  for  all  the 

powers  of  Protector  and  Parliament  were  carefully  defined 
and  separated,  no  alteration  in  their  respective  powers  be- 
ing allowed.  The  liberty  of  the  Commons  was  preserved 
by  its  being  made  impossible  for  the  Protector  to  dissolve 
them  till  they  should  have  sat  five  months.  Here  then 
was  the  barrier  against  party  violence,  and  to  this  barrier 
Cromwell  looked  to  save  the  kingdom. 

With  a  settled  form  of  government  all  might  go  well, 
Peace  with  and  in  foreign  affairs  the  outlook  was  pro- 
Holland.  1654.  misirig.  The  Dutch  had  been  beaten  and 


MILITARY  DESPOTISM.  65 

brought  to  terms,  and  now  bowed  before  English  com- 
mercial supremacy.  Cromwell  had  allied  himself  closely 
with  Sweden  in  order  to  keep  open  the  Baltic  trade  against 
the  monopolizing  spirit  of  Danes  and  Dutch,  and  it  was 
this  alliance  which  had  brought  the  latter  to  terms. 

The  test  of  the  new  government  would  be  a  Parliament, 
and  this  met  in  September,  1654.     Scotland  and  Ireland 
were  for  the  first  time  represented  at  West-   Pariiament 
minster,  and  a  rational  rearrangement  of  the   upsets  the 
constituencies,  foreshadowing  in  many  points   scheme- 
the   famous    Reform    Bill   of  1832,    had    been   carried 
out.     But  Cromwell's  plan  met  with  little  respect.     His 
opponents   in   the   new   Parliament  discussed   the  very 
foundation  of  the  whole,  "  government  in  the  hands  of  a     /' 
single  person  and  Parliament ".TThe  Protector  thereupon./ 
declared  that  they  were  not  to  criticise  any  "  fundamen-K 
tal "  part  of  the  new  scheme,  and  turned  out  of  Parlia- 
ment those  who  persisted  in  doing  soTj  Yet  the  remainder      , 
proved  so  obstinate  that  a  dissolution  occurred  after  the    / 
legal  five  months  stipulated  in  the  "Instrument".     They 
unpopularity  in  which  this  coup  d'etat  involved  the  Pro- 
tector caused  the  Royalists  to  attempt  a  rising  in  Wilt- 
shire under  Penruddock.     It  was  easily  suppressed,  but 
the  need  of  strengthening  the  central  authority  in 
country   districts   led   to   a   new   device.     Englan 
divided    into    eleven    provinces,    over   which    as 
officers  were  placed.     These  "  Major-generals  " 
organize  the  local  militia,  and  to  use  it  for  police 
poses.     This  temporarily  abrogated  the  system  of  local 
government  established  by  the  Tudors.     The  institutions 
of  the  country  were  in  abeyance,  taxes  were  imposed 
illegally,  and  men  were  arbitrarily  imprisoned.     Republi- 
cans and  Independents  complained  of  these  "pashas"  and 
their  high-handed  doings.     Yet  much  was  done  which 
made   in  the    Protector's   favour.     Men   nominated   to 
livings  were  carefully  supervised  by  a  board  of  "Triers". 
Jews  were  allowed  to  return  to  England  for  the  first  time 
since  1290.     The  legal  system  was  reformed  and  simpli- 
fied.    Yet  discontent  increased. 


66  PETITION   AND   ADVICE. 

When  a  new  parliament  assembled  in  September,  1656, 
foreign  politics  were  for  the  moment  in  the  ascendant. 
The  two  great  powers  of  France  and  Spain  were  now 
face  to  face  on  the  conclusion  of  the  Thirty  Years  War; 
each  was  anxious  for  the  alliance  of  England.  Cromwell 
France  or  chose  France.  This  secured  the  expulsion 
Spain?  of  Prince  Charles  from  French  soil,  and 
was  more  likely  to  satisfy  glowing  Protestantism  than  any 
dealings  with  Spain.  Philip  IV.  was  the  champion  of 
Catholicism,  and,  moreover,  claimed  a  complete  mono- 
poly of  the  West  Indian  trade.  English  enterprise  found 
vent  in  a  successful  attack  on  the  rich  isle  of  Jamaica, 
and  war  was  declared  against  Spain  in  February,  1656. 
It  was  not  long  before  France  actively  joined  in  the  war, 
and  Cromwell  was  able  to  secure  from  her  the  restoration 
of  the  Protestants  of  the  Waldensian  Valleys,  whom  the 
Duke  of  Savoy  had  been  persecuting.  Dunkirk  was 
taken  for  England  before  the  Protector's  deadi., 
/  The  new  Parliament  had  been  carefully  picked.  The 
V  "  Instrument "  had  given  the  Protector's  Council  the 
The  "  Petition  Power  to  reject  members  who  were  considered 
and  Advice",  "disabled  to  be  elected".  Nearly  100  Re- 
publicans and  Presbyterians  having  been  thus 
excluded,  the  remainder  proceeded  to  offer  Cromwell  the 
title  of  king  under  a  new  documentary  constitution.  This 
"Humble  Petition  and  Advice"  gave  more  freedom  and 
\/  power  to  Parliament,  though  it  still  remained  powerless 
to  touch  any  of  the  "  fundamentals  ".  A  house  of  Peers 
was  also  to  be  created.  Cromwell,  after  much  debate, 
refused  to  take  the  kingship,  but  accepted  the  rest  of  the 
new  constitution. 

When   Parliament   met   again   in   January,   1658,  the 

members   before   excluded  were   allowed   to  take  their 

Again  the     seats,  as  no  power  of  scrutiny  had  been  put 

plan  fails.     m    the    hands   of  the   government    by   the 

"  Petition   and   Advice".     Their   objection  to  the  new 

constitution,  and  to  the  "  other  house ",  as  they  called 

Cromwell's  Peers,  made  it  impossible  for  the  Protector  to 

keep  them  in   session  without  altering  his  views.     He 


DEATH   OF   CROMWELL.  67 

expected  his  Parliament  to  be  loyal  to  a  constitution 
which  many  of  them  had  had  no  hand  in  framing :  as 
this  was  impossible,  he  dissolved  them.  It  was  useless  for 
him  to  beg  for  unity  in  the  face  of  the  dangers  which 
from  time  to  time  threatened  the  Republic.  They  would 
not  listen. 

Thus  he  who  for  years  had  kept  England  safe,  pros- 
perous, and  respected,  had  settled  nothing.     His  death, 
which  occurred  in  September,  1658,  left  the   Death  of  the 
problem  of  government  to  be  faced  by  men   Protector, 
infinitely  less  able  than  himself. 

The  late  Lord  Protector's  rule  had  satisfied  no  party, 
though  it  had  curbed  all :  and  now  the  strife  was  going  to 
break  out   again.      His   son    Richard,    who   Richard.s 
succeeded  by  virtue  of  the  provisions  of  the   short 
"Petition  and  Advice",  was  both  by  taste  and   l 
education  a  mere  country  gentleman.     He  had  neither 
the  power  nor  the  wish  to  take  up  the  task  which  lay 
before  him,  and  his  speedy  fall  made  way  for  absolute 
anarchy.     Cromwell  had  foreseen  this;  but  when  he  had 
named   the   many   parties   whose   existence    made   free 
government  impossible,  he,  had  omitted  to  speak  of  one — 
the  party  which  would  restore  the  king  in  order  to  secure 
order  and  peace. 

On  Richard's  accession,  the  military  officers  under 
Lambert,  Fleetwood,  and  others  at  once  began  to 
demand  for  the  army  a  leader  independent  of  Quarrel  with 
the  civil  government.  Oliver  had  been  both  the  Army. 
General  and  Protector,  but  Richard  hardly  knew  a  pike 
from  a  musket.  To  resist  this  movement  the  new 
Protector  summoned  a  Parliament,  in  which  he  had  a 
majority  against  the  "  Wallingford  House "  party,  as  the 
officers  were  named.  His  Protectorate  was  recognized, 
and  the  army,  finding  that  they  were  outvoted  in  Parlia- 
ment, demanded  a  dissolution.  Richard,  fearing  an 
outbreak  of  civil  war,  took  the  only  sensible  course  and 
abdicated,  on  the  220!  of  April,  1659. 

The  party  of  Lambert,  with  whom  the  Republican  foes 
of  the  Protectorate  were  allied,  was  now  supreme.     But 


68  A  CIVIL  CHAOS. 

it  contained  a  strong  leaven  of  "  Levellers "  and  other 

The  army      extremists.     A  fresh  element  of  discord  was 

^Rump"?6  added  when  its  leaders  resolved  to  restore 

May,  1659!     the   "  Rump "   Parliament,  which  had  been 

driven  from  Westminster  by  Oliver. 

The  tottering  fabric  of  the  Republic  now  consisted  of 
this  caricature  of  a  Parliament — it  consisted  of  only  40 
And  quarrels  members, — a  few  self-seeking  soldier  leaders, 
ensue.  an(j  an  army  which  was  daily  becoming  more 

unpopular  owing  to  its  connection  with  the  Levelling  pro- 
grammes. The  wildest  discord  was  rife  between  the  civil 
and  military  elements.  Parliament  claimed  supremacy, 
while  the  Army,  fresh  from  Lambert's  victory  over  some 
Royalists  in  Cheshire,  did  not  care  to  conceal  its  claim  to 
complete  independence.  Finally,  in  October,  1659,  rely- 
ing on  the  adherence  of  Monk,  who  was  commanding  in 
Scotland,  the  "Rump"  took  the  daring  step  of  depriving  of 
their  commissions  Lambert  and  those  of  his  friends  who 
had  encouraged  petitions  in  favour  of  the  independence  of 
the  Army.  The  irate  officers  replied  by  driving  the 
"  Rump  "  a  second  time  from  Westminster. 

George  Monk,  from  his  post  beyond  the  Tweed,  was 
grimly  watching  the  dance  at  Westminster.  Nominally  a 
intervention  Presbyterian,  certainly  loathing  the  whole  race 
of  Monk.  of  Sectaries  and  Levellers,  he  saw  in  Lambert's 
triumph  nothing  but  danger  for  the  future.  When  it  was 
announced  that  he  was  preparing  to  march  into  England, 
the  very  rumour  of  his  opposition  sufficed  to  overthrow 
the  military  government  in  London;  and  while  Lambert 
marched  northward  to  confront  Monk,  the  "  Rump " 
returned  uninvited  to  Westminster.  The  fleet  held  to  the 
civil  power,  the  sailors  petitioned  for  a  free  and  full 
Parliament,  and  such  leaders  of  the  Army  as  could  be 
safely  touched  were  banished. 

Monk  started  from  Scotland  on  New-year's  Day,  1660. 
In  London,  where  he  was  at  once  completely  master  of 
His  march  to  affairs,  he  restored  the  Presbyterian  members 
London.  expelled  by  Colonel  Pride  twelve  years  before, 
and  declared  for  a  free  Parliament.  The  Royalist  Pres- 


THE   RESTORATION.  69 

byterian  members  were  now  in  a  majority.     Writs  were 
issued  for  a  free  "Convention",  and  the  Long  Parliament 
at  last  consented  of  its  own  free  will  to  dissolve  itself 
(March,   1660).     The  new  convention   Parliament   con- 
tained a  large  majority  for  the  moderates.     On  all  sides 
was  heard  the  cry  for  the  restoration  of  the  old  order. 
Charles  was  in  Holland,  and  issued  from  Breda,  at  Monk's 
suggestion,    his   famous    "  Declaration ".       It   promised 
amnesty,  toleration,  and  a  general  settlement  The  King's    <^/ 
of  the  kingdom  in  accordance  with  the  de-   R«tum. 
cisions  of  Parliament.     This  was  considered  sufficient. 
The  more  prudent  Presbyterians  wished  for  some  clearer 
understanding  with  the  prince,  but  the  nation  would  not 
wait.     The  reaction  was  in  full  flow.     The  first  act  of 
the  Convention  was  to  invite  Charles  to  return,  and  to     / 
resolve  that  government  in  England  was  vested  in  King,*/ 
Lords,  and  Commons.     The  Naseby,  rechristened  for  the 
occasion  the  Royal  Charles,  brought  the  king  to  Dover, 
and  he  reached  the  capital  on  May  29  amid  universal 
rejoicings. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

CHARLES    II.:     1660-1685. 

Charles,  the  eldest  son  of  the  late  monarch,  was  thus 
accepted  as  king,  not  so  much  because  he  had  a  right  to 
the  position,  as  because  the  nation  could  not  character 
get  on  without  him.     The  experience  of  the  of  the 
last  few  years  was  felt  to  be  worse  than  any- 
thing that  had  gone  before.     Men  of  all  conditions  now 
rallied  to  the  side  of  the  crown  because  it  was  likely  to 
be   the   champion   of  a   known   order   of   government. 
Cavaliers  and  Republicans,   Presbyterians  and  Church- 
men made,  a  temporary  alliance  in  the  interests  of  the 
old  constitution. 

The  Rebellion  had  settled  hardly  anything.     The  pro- 
blem of  Sovereignty  was  still  without  a  solution.     There 


70  THE   NEW   KING'S   PROSPECTS. 

should  not  be  a  sovereign  army  or  a  sovereign  presbytery ; 
in  that,  and  that  only,  men  were  agreed.  The  question 
Result  of  the  of  Toleration  was  not  answered.  The  coun- 
Rebeiiion.  try  was  just  as  much  split  up  into  parties  as 
before,  but  the  nation  as  a  whole  was  nervous  about  order, 
and  forgot-  to  be  anxious  about  liberty.  One  thing  alone 
was  tolerably  certain  as  a  result  of  the  long  struggle.  No 
future  king  could  hope  to  set  himself  for  any  long  period 
against  the  will  of  the  entire  people.  If  Charles  wished 
to  have  his  own  way  it  must  also  be  the  way  of  the  nation, 
or  of  a  clear  majority  of  the  nation.  Ship  money  or  forced 
loans  were  not  likely  to  recur.  If  this  was  the  net  result/ 
of  the  war  it  would  soon  become  clear  that  the  king  had 
a  fair  chance  to  rule  as  he  pleased,  provided  he  could 
play  off  the  numerous  parties  against  each  other,  and 
keep  the  fear  of  civil  war  well  before  the  eyes  of  moderate 
men. 

Now  this  is  exactly  what  Charles  did.  He  was  a  cool- 
headed  selfish  man,  with  admirable  manners,  and  no  con- 
character  of  victions  to  trouble  him.  He  was  not  likely 
Charles.  to  make  a  crusade  to  save  bishops,  or  to  save 
anything.  But  he  liked  his  own  way,  not  because  he  felt 
that  he  had  a  duty  to  do,  but  because  he  found  it  pleasant 
to  be  independent.  Yet  on  one  point  he  shared  his  / 
father's  and  grandfather's  ideas.  He  believed  in  they 
mission  of  the  Stewart  family,  and  would  put  up  even 
with  personal  inconvenience  rather  than  repudiate  the 
Divine  hereditary  right.  Fortunately  for  him,  he  pos- 
sessed, along  with  this  view,  the  inestimable  gift  of  tact, 
in  which  his  family  was  generally  so  conspicuously  want- 
ing. He  knew  as  well  as  anybody  that  he  could  not 
withstand  the  whole  nation.  As  he  himself  put  it,  he 
did  not  wish  "  to  go  on  his  travels  again  ". 

Hence  the  whole  reign  became  a  struggle,  in  which 
the  king,  however  much  he  might  offend  one  party,  was 
character  of  never  without  a  party  to  side  with  him.  The 
the  Reign.  reason  of  this  is  to  be  looked  for  in  the  old 
religious  parties — which  now  take  three  forms — Church- 
men, Protestant  Dissenters  of  all  sorts,  and  Roman 


ANALYSIS   OF  THE   REIGN.  71 

Catholics.  Here  were  sufficient  sources  of  discord  on 
a  vital  question;  a  fourth  element  was  soon  added — the 
King  of  France.  Charles  was  not  proud,  and  if  his  par- 
liament or  his  opposition  proved  troublesome  he  would 
apply  for  money  and  advice  to  Louis  XIV.  That  prince 
generally  found  it  worth  his  while  to  supply  both. 

There  are   five  well-marked   periods   into  which   the 
twenty-five  years  of  this  reign  may  be  divided.     The  first 
lasted  only  about  a  year,  and  witnessed  the  Periods  of 
attempt   of   the   Convention    Parliament   to  Re'g 
settle  the  outstanding  questions  of  religion  and  politics 
on  a  moderate  basis.     Its  place  was  taken  by  the  "  Cava- 
lier"  Parliament,  which  set  to  work  to  strengthen  the 
revived  monarchy,  re-establish  the  Anglican  Church,  and 
persecute  all  other  creeds.     This  was  during  the  full  tide 
of  reaction  against  the  ideals  of  Puritanism.     The  seconc 
period  (1662-1672)  finds  this  Parliament  gradually  losing] 
confidence  in  the  king,  whose  schemes  of  toleration  it 
hated,  and  whose  minister  it  impeached.     The  king  and 
his  secret  councillors  now  trafficked  with  Louis,  and  there 
gradually  appeared  a  fair  possibility  of  a  complete  reaction^ 
against  the  restered  monarchy.     Two  parties  were  form-j 
ing;  one  that  of  the  Parliament,  whose  religious  policj 
had  been  outraged,  another  the  popular  party,  which  hatec 
the  foreign  intrigues  and  the  persecuting  statutes  to  whicj 
the  king  had  assented.     The  third  period  (1672-1679^ 
was  one  in  which  this  twofold  opposition  failed  to  com-  j 
bine  against  the  crown,  and  Charles  was  able  to  play  off/ 
his  opponents  one  against  the  other.    In  the  fourth  period 
(1679-1681)  a  great  opposition,   the   beginning  of  the\ 
future  Whig  party,  was  organized,  and  the  attempt  was  | 
made  to  oust  the  Duke  of  York,  an  avowed  Papist,  from 
the  succession  to  the  crown.     This  question  divided  the 
nation,  and  the  popular  party,  in  the  hands  of  immpderate,/ 
men,  wrecked  its  own  cause.     The  last  period  (i68i-\ 
1685)  found  the  king  secure  and  triumphant,  free  from\ 
Parliament,  and  from  his  other  enemies,  who  had  roused  I 
the  fears  of  the  nation,  and  hurried  all  those  who  cared^  - 
more  for  order  than  for  liberty  into  the  royal  camp. 


72  THE  CONVENTION   AT  WORK. 

The  Convention,  which  had  no  strict  claim  to  the  name 

of  Parliament  since  it  was  not  summoned  by  royal  writ, 

had   a   tremendous   problem    to   deal   with. 

1  he  Kestora-  .  5T       ,.    .  ,          .... 

tion  Settle-  After  such  a  time  of  religious  and  political 
ment,  1660.  discorcl  it  was  no  easy  task  to  set  things  in 
order.  Some  revenge  upon  the  regicides  was  to  be  ex- 
pected, and  thirteen  of  the  most  prominent  were  put  to 
death.  A  bill  of  Indemnity,  covering  the  whole  period 
from  1637  to  1660,  secured  other  men  from  punishment. 
The  House  of  Lords  was  restored,  and  the  bishops  re- 
gained their  seats.  The  army  was  disbanded,  the  royal 
income  fixed  at  ^£i,  200,000  per  annum,  and  the  crown 
lands  restored.  But  the  CavaHers,  who  had  been  obliged 
to  sell  their  lands,  were  not  reinstated  if  they  had  in  any 
way  recognized  the  usurping  government.  The  religious 
question  was  far  more  difficult.  The  king  had  been  both 
a  Covenanter  and  a  Roman  Catholic  in  his  time,  and  it 
now  suited  him  to  pose  as  an  Anglican.  The  Conven- 
tion represented  that  combination  of  Churchmen  and 
Presbyterians  which  had  brought  back  the  king.  They 
restored  the  clergy  who  had  been  ejected  from  livings  by 
the  Puritans,  but  did  not  disturb  men  -who  had  been 
rightly  inducted  by  the  patrons,  and  thus  left  many  Pres- 
byterians and  Independents  in  possession  of  livings.  The 
only  arrangement  which  could  make  this  system  work 
well  would  have  been  a  scheme  of  "comprehension", 
which  is  the  term  used  for  the  adaptation  of  the  Church 
to  suit  the  views  of  the  more  moderate  Dissenters.  The 
king  wished  to  carry  this  out,  but  as  he  included  tolera- 
tion for  Independents  and  Roman  Catholics,  it  was  not 
likely  that  the  Churchmen  and  Presbyterians  would  agree 
to  it. 

\In  December,  1660,  this  famous  Assembly  was  dis- 
solved, and  an  intensely  strong  Anglican  and  Cavalier 
The"Cava-  spirit  animated  the  new  Parliament.  It  con- 
mVnt.^eei1-*"  demned  the  claims  of  the  Long  Parliament 
1679-  '  to  regulate  the  militia,  and  declared  that  force 

to  be  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  crown.  The  religious 
reaction  was  complete ;  and  after  the  failure  of  a  confer- 


PERSECUTION  OF   DISSENTERS.  73 

ence  at  the  Savoy  Palace,  in  which  Churchmen  and  Pres- 
byterians made  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  bridge  over  their 
differences,  the  true  character  of  the  change  was  shown. 
Parliament  passed  the  Corporation  Act  (1661),  by  which 
all  members  of  town  corporations  were  compelled  to  re- 
nounce the  Covenant,  repudiate  the  right  of  people  to 
resist  the  crown,  and  receive  the  Sacrament  as  Church- 
men. The  king  was  obliged  to  accept  this  policy  as  he^ 
was  in  need  of  money,  and  Parliament  cared  more  for 
their  church  than  even  for  their  king.  In  May,  1662,  the 
Presbyterians  who  still  held  livings  were  confronted  by 
the  "Act  of  Uniformity",  which  compelled  all  beneficed 
clergy  to  accept  the  Prayer  Book,  and  two  thousand 
ministers  quitted  their  posts  rather  than  submit.  It  was 
not  unnatural  that  Churchmen  should  think  it  necessary 
that  men  who  held  benefices  should  be  ordained  by 
bishops  and  believe  in  the  legal  church.  But  they  had 
shown  a  persecuting  spirit  in  forcing  town  officers  to 
believe  as  they  did,  and  were  soon  to  cruelly  persecute 
those  who  had  been  removed  from  office  in  the  Church. 
The  Cavaliers  had  now  struck  a  blow  at  their  enemies  in 
town  and  parish,  and  carried  the  king  with  them.  They 
shortly  afterwards  took  vengeance  on  Sir  Harry  Vane, 
the  hero  of  the  scene  in  the  House  of  Commons  when 
Stafford's  famous  words  in  the  Council  were  produced. 
He,  with  Lambert,  was  tried  for  treason,  on  the  ground 
that  Charles  II.  was  legally  king  during  the  period  of 
Cromwell's  government.  Vane  was  executed  on  this 
flimsy  argument.  The  next  period  raises  the  question 
how  far  Charles  could  be  dragged  along  by  this  party. 

The  chief  minister  was  now  the  Earl  of  Clarendon, 
who,  as  Sir  Edward  Hyde,  had  been  one  of  Charles  the 
First's  most  trusted  advisers.    He  was  strongly  Clarendon-s 
opposed  to  Toleration,  and  wished  the  Church  Administra- 
te keep  her  supremacy.    Indeed,  the  persecut- t!  on>  lK 
ing  statutes  of  this  period  have  been  named  the  "Clarendon 
Code".    Charles  did  not  like  the  domination  of  Clarendon 
any  better  than  the  supremacy  of  Parliament,  but,  for  a 
time,  all  went  well.     The  king  was  married  (1662)  to  a 


74  FOREIGN   POLITICS. 

Portuguese  princess,  Catharine  of  Braganza.  This  alliance 
naturally  brought  the  English  government  into  line  with 
France,  for  Louis  was  supporting  Portugal  in  the  main- 
tenance of  her  independence  against  Spain.  The  sale  of 
Dunkirk  to  the  French  king  bound  this  friendship  closer, 
and  pleased  Charles,  who  saw  in  the  purchase-money  a 
means  of  independence.  But  there  was  no  harmony,  for 
the  king  was  already  talking  of  using  his  inherent  power 
of  dispensing1  with  laws  in  order  to  lighten  the  burdens 
upon  Roman  Catholics  and  Protestant  Pissenters.  Par- 
liament and  the  Chancellor  Clarendon  agreed  in  resisting 
this  royal  attempt  to  undermine  their  policy. 
)  A  war  with  Holland  temporarily  united  king  and  Parlia- 
•  ment.  The  Dutch  were  still  our  commercial  rivals  on  the  sea 
The  Dutch  and  our  colonial  opponents  in  the  Indies.  In 
war,  1665-1667.  the  (jayS  of  King  James  English  Puritan  colon- 
ists had  sailed  to  the  shores  of  North  America,  and  the 
descendants  of  these  famous  "  Pilgrim  Fathers  "  had  now 
established  a  great  group  of  colonies  east  of  the  Hudson 
river.  This  settlement  was  known  as  New  England.  Lower 
down  the  coast,  Virginia,  the  oldest  of  the  English  settle- 
ments abroad,  had  grown  into  a  prosperous  slave-owning 
country.  Between  these  two  settlements  was  a  district 
colonized  by  the  Dutch,  and  hence  constant  quarrels  arose. 
Charles  was  also  angry  with  Holland  on  his  own  account. 
His  sister  Mary  had  married  the  Prince  of  Orange,  who 
died  young.  On  his  decease  the  Dutch  refused  to  con- 
tinue his  son  William  III.  in  his  father's  office  of  Stadt- 
holder.  A  great  statesman,  named  de  Witt,  now  guided 
Dutch  politics,  under  the  title  of  Grand  Pensionary,  and 
the  young  William  of  Orange,  Charles's  nephew,  the  future 
King  of  England,  was  kept  out  of  the  chief-magistracy 
which  his  ancestors  had  held  for  three  generations. 

The  war  broke  out  in  1665,  and  was  hotly  waged  at  sea. 
The  King  of  France,  for  the  moment,  joined  the  Dutch 
against  England.  His  policy  was  a  deep  and  clever  one. 

1  Dispensing  power  means  the  ancient  Royal  right  to  pardon  the  breach  of  an 
Act :  suspending  power  is  a  claim  to  declare  the  Act  or  Acts  to  be  no  longer  in 
force. 


LOUIS'   PROGRAMME.  75 

The  real  object  which  he  had  in  view  was  the  exten- 
sion of  France  to  the  Rhine,  and  the  gradual  absorption 
of  the  decaying  Spanish  empire.  For  these  Louis  XIV 
two  objects  he  strove  until  his  death.  All  and  his 
the  lands  between  the  French  border  and  the  schemes- 
Rhine — the  Spanish  Netherlands  (Belgium),  Luxembourg, 
Lorraine,  the  county  of  Burgundy,  and  Alsace — were 
meant  to  be  attacked  in  turn.  Louis'  wife  was  the  sister  of 
King  Charles  II.  of  Spain,  a  sickly  boy,  who,  it  was  hoped, 
would  soon  die.  His  vast  inheritance  might  then  fall  to 
the  French  king,  in  spite  of  his  renunciation  in  the  Treaty 
of  the  Pyrenees  of  all  future  rights  which  should  accrue 
through  his  wife.  All  this  was  plainly  opposed  to  Dutch 
interests,  for  the  Dutch  were  bound  to  resent  the  approach 
of  so  powerful  a  monarch  to  their  frontiers.1  But  Louis 
was,  for  the  present,  pledged  by  treaty  to  assist  them,  and 
did  not  wish  to  show  his  hand. 

When  Louis  declared  war  (1666)  the  English  govern- 
ment was  extending  its  policy  of  persecution,  being  alarmed 
lest  the  Dissenters  should  side  with  the  Dutch.  E  lish  diffi. 
Thus  the  cruel  Conventicle  Act  imposed  in  cuities,  1665- 
1 664  severe  penalties  against  those  who  should  l667' 
worship  in  any  way  other  than  that  prescribed  by  the  Act 
of  Uniformity;  and  in  1665  the  Dissenting  ministers  were 
further  forbidden  by  the  Five  Mile  Act  to  approach  within 
five  miles  of  any  corporate  town,  and  so  debarred  from 
earning  a  livelihood  by  teaching.  The  great  Plague  was 
raging  in  London,  and  a  few  months  later  the  great  Fire 
destroyed  a  large  part  of  the  city.  Thus  England  was 
prepared  by  her  disunion  and  disaster  rather  for  peace 
than  for  war.  The  Dutch  also  became  alive  Peace  of 
to  the  dangers  with  which  they  were  threat-  Breda,  July, 
ened  by  Louis'  schemes.  Thus  negotiations  l667' 
were  opened  between  the  two  principals.  In  order  to 
hasten  the  English  into  peace  de  Witt  sent  his  vessels 
into  the  Thames  and  Medway,  and  "  the  roar  of  foreign 
guns  was  heard  for  the  first  and  last  time  by  the  citizens  of 
London".  In  the  end  England  secured  the  Dutch  colonies 

1  See  map  p.  105. 
(962)  F 


7 6  PARLIAMENT   GROWS   DISCONTENTED. 

between  New  England  and  Virginia,  while  the  Dutch 
kept  their  hold  on  the  Spice  Islands  of  the  East  Indies. 

For  some  time  discontent  had  been  growing  both  in 
and  out  of  Parliament;  there  were  grave  scandals  as  to 
p  I!  f  the  management  of  public  money  voted  for 

clarendon,  the  War;  there  were  rumours  that  the  king 
August,  1667.  had  a  design  to  ally  himself  with  France  and 

to  govern  without  a  Parliament  by  means  of  armed  force ; 
small  as  the  standing  army  was,  since  all  but  a  few 
regiments  had  been  disbanded  in  1660,  it  was  not  un- 
naturally considered  a  menace  to  freedom;  the  sale  of 
Dunkirk  was  thought  almost  as  great  a  national  disgrace 
as  the  burning  of  English  shipping  by  the  Dutch  in  the 
Medway.  All  ills  were  ascribed  to  the  minister.  Charles 
was  not  inclined  to  exert  himself  to  save  his  father's  old 
friend,  for  Clarendon  did  not  share  his  views  as  to 
Toleration,  or  scruple  to  show  contempt  for  the  king's 
immoral  life.  He  was  impeached  and  banished. 

The  next  administration  is  known  in  history  as  the 
"Cabal",  because  the  names  of  the  men  who  were 
The  "Cabal",  chiefly  consulted  by  the  king  during  the  next 
1667-1673.  few  years  were  found  to  spell  Cabal1  by  their 
initial  letters.  They  were  Clifford  and  Arlington,  who 
were  Roman  Catholics;  Buckingham,  the  son  of  James 
I.'s  favourite;  Anthony  Ashley,  afterwards  Earl  of  Shaftes- 
bury;  and  Lauderdale,  who  was  governing  Scotland  in 
the  Episcopal  interest  and  persecuting  the  Covenanters, 
who,  after  the  execution  of  their  leader  Argyle  at  the 
Restoration,  continued  to  be  an  oppressed  and  discredited 
party  until  the  end  of  the  century.  These  five  men  were 
widely  different  in  their  ideas,  and  had  but  one  common 
object — a  broader  view  in  church  matters  than  was 
prevalent  in  Parliament. 

Louis  was  alarming  the  Dutch  by  his  successes  in  the 
Spanish  Netherlands,  which  he  was  now  claiming  by  right 
of  his  wife.  Englishmen  were  hostile  to  the  advance  of 
the  great  Catholic  monarch,  and  an  alliance  was  made 
by  England,  Holland,  and  Sweden  to  force  him  to  desist. 

1  Cabal  =  Cabala,  secret  knowledge  of  the  occult  sort. 


CHARLES  INTRIGUES  WITH  FRANCE.  77 

He  gave  way  for  the   time,  and   restored   the  county 
of  Burgundy,  though  he  kept  several  recently  acquired 
fortresses  in  the  Netherlands.     But  Charles   Triple  AIH- 
had    never    cared    for   the    popular    policy  ^."c|andf 
of   the   Triple   Alliance,   and   soon  entered   Dover,  °668- 
into  a   secret   negotiation    with  the  French   l670' 
king.      Louis   was   anxious    to   crush   the    Dutch,    who 
were  bound  to  be  the  opponents  of  his  grasping  frontier 
policy,  and  was  most  anxious  to  bind  Charles  and  the 
English  to  neutrality  if  not  to  co-operation.     Parliament*/ 
was  opposed  to  Louis,  and  therefore  Charles  could  not 
join  him  unless  he  obtained  money  for  doing  so,  since 
such  an  alliance  was  bound   to   alienate   his   subjects.      / 
Here  at  last  was  a  chance  to  get  free  from  the  leading 
strings  in  which  the  "Cavalier  Parliament"  had  kept  him, 
and  the  king  seized  it.     By  the  secret  Treaty  of  Dover, 
known  only  to  Clifford  and  Arlington,  Charles  agreed  to 
help  Louis  against  the  Dutch,  and  to  declare  himself  a 
Roman  Catholic  for  a  round  sum  of  ^"200,000  a  year. 
This  treaty  was  nearly  as  ridiculous  as  it  was  disgraceful. 
That  the  English  would  ever  allow  themselves  to  be  led 
back  to  Popery  by  their  king  ought  by  this  time  to  have 
been  clear  even  to  a  Stewart. 

The  real  policy  of  the  Cabal  was  shown  when  in  1672 
the  king  issued  his  famous  Declaration  of  Indulgence. 

Thp_  Pqrjiflmpnf^wriir.h    had    already    shown    The  Indul- 

the  church  than  for  the   eence. 


crown,  was  not  sitting  at  the  moment  ;  and  the  king's 
supposed  power  to  suspend  ecclesiastical  laws  was  used 
to  grant  freedom  from  the  stringent  penal  laws  to  both 
Nonconformists  and  Roman  Catholics.  The  leader  of 
this  policy  was  Ashley,  who  had  just  been  made  Earl  of 
Shaftesbury  and  Lord  Chancellor. 

When  Parliament  met  in  1673,  after  a  long  prorogation, 
the  Declaration  of  Indulgence  was   before   their  eyes, 
though  the  treaty  with  Louis  was  still  a  secret,    opposition 
War  had  just  been  declared  against  Holland,    increases. 
and  men  who  knew  nothing  of  the  secret  plot  were  not 
sorry  to  punish  Holland  for  her  attack  on  English  ships 


78  GROWING  OPPOSITION. 

in  1667.  The  third  period  of  the  reign  opens  with  this 
session,  in  which  the  king  soon  found  himself  opposed  to 
two  parties:  the  Cavaliers,  who  resented  the  Declaration, 
and  the  moderate  men,  who  began  to  fear  that  the  De- 
claration was  only  part  of  the  French  alliance,  and  tended 
to  Roman  Catholicism  and  arbitrary  government  rather 
than  to  the  relief  of  Protestant  Dissenters. 

At  first  the  Parliament  was  eager  for  the  war  against 
the  Dutch.  Shaftesbury,  the  Lord  Chancellor,  made  his 
The  Test  celebrated  speech,  in  which  he  announced 
Act,  1673.  the  policy  of  the  French  alliance  (he  knew 
nothing  of  the  secret  treaty)  in  the  words  "  Delenda  est 
Carthago  ".  Parliament  voted  large  sums,  but  showed  no 
sign  of  bowing  to  the  Indulgence  scheme.  It  was  not 
long  before  its  views  were  more  clearly  expressed.  The 
king  had  to  withdraw  the  Declaration,  and  the  Test  Act 
was  passed.  It  declared  that  all  who  held  any  office 
under  the  crown  must  renounce  the  doctrine  of  Tran- 
substantiation  and  receive  the  Sacrament  in  the  English 
Church.  This  was  the  final  blow  to  the  Cabal. 

Meanwhile  Englishmen  were  becoming  alarmed  at  the 
successes  of  Louis.  Perhaps  some  suspicions  of  the 
Adisurfited  secret  treaty  were  abroad.  The  war  with 
opposition.  Holland  became  unpopular;  the  fear  of 
Roman  Catholicism  increased  when  men  reflected  that 
we  were  at  war  with  a  Protestant  power  in  alliance  with  a 
Catholic  one.  Many  feared  that  Charles  would  use  his 
army  to  make  himself  independent,  for  the  Common- 
wealth was  not  forgotten;  and  Shaftesbury,  the  apostle  of 
toleration,  was  dismissed.  He  very  soon  entered  the 
ranks  of  the  opposition,  but  not,  of  course,  to  act  in 
alliance  with  the  bigoted  Churchmen  who  had  passed 
the  Test  Act.  The  various  elements  of  this  opposition 
were  not  likely  to  unite,  and  so  the  king,  at  present,  had 
little  to  fear.  Shaftesbury  had  been  willing  to  use  the 
Royal  Prerogative  to  gain  Toleration,  and  could  not 
therefore  complain  with  Parliament  of  the  Suspending 
power.  The  Cavaliers  of  the  Test  Act  were  not  likely 
to  join  the  originators  of  the  Indulgence.  But  the 


PARLIAMENT  UNPOPULAR.  79 

opposition  to  France  was  too  strong  to  be  resisted, 
and  in  1674  Charles  cleverly  yielded  so  much,  and  made 
peace  with  Holland.  Thus  the  king  had  twice  yielded 
his  point,  in  each  case  on  the  question  of  religion,  for 
his  alliance  with  Louis  was  really  a  Catholic  policy. 
So  disunited  were  his  opponents,  however,  that  he  might 
have  been  absolute  if  he  had  desisted  from  all  religious 
opposition  to  Parliament. 

There  was  in  1675  &  return  to  the  policy  of  Clarendon 
when  Sir  Thomas  Osborne,  Earl  of  Danby,  a  strong 
churchman  and  a  friend  of  royalty,  became  Danby  chief 
chief  adviser  of  the  crown.  But  the  popu-  minister, 
larity  of  this  long  Parliament  was  now  waning.  l6?5' 
It  had  outstayed  its  welcome.  Men  were  tired  of  its 
factious  temper,  especially  when  Danby  produced  a 
bill  to  impose  on  all  "placemen1"  an  oath  that  they 
would  neither  resist  the  crown  nor  attempt  alteration  of 
government  in  church  or  state.  This,  however,  he  failed 
to  convert  into  law.  The  leaders  of  the  Toleration  party 
were  anxious  for  a  dissolution,  as  they  hoped  for  a  broader 
religious  feeling  in  the  next  Parliament.  That  the  nation 
was  partly  of  the  same  opinion  may  be  peeling 
gathered  from  the  fact  that  the  government  against  Par- 
thought  proper  to  order  the  closing  of  the  1!  :nt>  l67°' 
"  coffee-houses ",  in  which  men  were  in  the  habit  of 
discussing  politics,  there  being  no  newspapers  to  read. 
Lastly  the  king  of  France,  who  was  now  obliged  to  face  a 
general  European  coalition  against  his  schemes,  was  most 
anxious  to  see  the  "Cavalier  Parliament"  dissolved. 
Their  strong  and- French  attitude  might,  he  thought,  force 
Charles  into  a  French  war  as  it  had  already  forced  him 
into  a  Dutch  peace.  When,  after  more  than  a  year's 
prorogation,  Parliament  reassembled  in  February,  1677, 
Louis'  anticipations  were  realized,  and  a  cry  for  a  French 
war  arose.  The  opposition  lords,  with  Shaftesbury  at 
their  head,  maintained  that  a  year's  prorogation  dissolved 
ipso  facto  a  Parliament,  since,  by  the  old  laws,  there  must 
be  a  meeting  every  year.  This  was  a  mere  quibble  for 

1  Persons  holding  office  unJer  the  crown. 


8o  CHARLES'  DIPLOMATIC  CONCESSIONS. 

the  Triennial  Act  of  1641,  requiring  a  meeting  at  least 
once  in  three  years,  was  still  in  force,  though  its  more 
stringent  provisions  had  been  repealed.  But  the  action 
of  these  leaders  serves  to  show  that  there  was  an  opposi- 
tion to  both  king  and  Parliament. 

In  this  situation  the  shrewd  king  once  more  proved 
his  tact.  Since  Parliament  was  averse  to  France  he 
The  king's  determined  to  side  with  them  and  desert  his 
change  of  French  alliance.  He  would  thus  play  off 
policy,  1677.  parnament  against  the  Toleration  party,  which 
suspected  his  Roman  Catholic  designs.  The  money  which 
he  could  no  longer  obtain  from  Louis  he  would  be  able  to 
get  from  his  subjects,  for,  his  real  aim  being  to  strengthen 
his  army  in  case  of  future  need,  money  was  absolutely 
necessary.  Thus  the  Toleration  party,  which  could  not, 
like  Louis  and  Parliament,  supply  money,  was  isolated. 
A  grand  opportunity  to  persuade  a  rather  incredulous" 
Parliament  of  his  anti-French  intentions  now  presented 
itself,  and  the  king  was  not  slow  to  take  it.  During  the 
Dutch  war  the  Grand  Pensionary  had  been  murdered  by 
a  mob,  and  the  young  Prince  of  Orange  had  been  re- 
stored, at  the  age  of  twenty-one,  to  the  Stadtholdership. 
This  Protestant  prince,  the  lifelong  enemy  of  the  great 
French  king,  was  now  married,  with  the  approval  of 
Charles,  to  his  cousin  Mary,  eldest  daughter  of  James, 
Duke  of  York,  the  king's  brother.  Parliament  was  greatly 
pleased  at  this  third  marked  success.  They  voted  a  mil- 
lion, and  the  astute  king  was  able  to  add  to  his  army. 
He  soon  found,  however,  that  he  had  only  exchanged 
masters. 

And  as  for  Louis  his  revenge  was  easy.  There  was  a 
growing  fear  in  England  that  Charles  had  meant  to  secure 
Theopposi-  ^is  own  independence  of  Parliament  by  an 
tion  and  army  and  French  help.  The  French  king 
LOUIS  xiv.  cieveriy  stimulated  this  fear,  and  took  into 
his  pay  several  of  the  unscrupulous  leaders  of  the  English 
opposition,  while  assuring  them  that  he  had  deserted  the 
cause  of  their  sovereign.  The  Toleration  party,  forsaken 
by  Charles,  was  taken  up  by  Louis! 


A   NATIONAL  PANIC.  8l 

This  was,  indeed,  a  sufficient  complication,  and  yet 
Charles  added  another  string  to  his  bow  by  asking  Louis 
to  pay  him  large  sums  to  enable  him  to  be  A  complicated 
independent  of  the  Cavalier  Parliament.  Sosituation>l678 
intricate  had  the  politics  of  England  become  that,  though 
king  and  Parliament  were  apparently  in  alliance  against 
France,  both  were  asking  money  from  that  power  to  do 
its  behests.  Such  a  situation  could  not  last.  The  French 
king  took  the  opportunity  to  make  peace  with  Holland 
at  Nimuegen  (August,  1678),  and  obtained  his  coveted 
county  of  Burgundy  together  with  many  fortresses  in  the 
Netherlands.  Parliament  was  becoming  more  and  more 
nervous  as  to  the  intentions  of  Charles.  The  opposition 
was  becoming  stronger  and  clearer,  though  there  wras,  as 
yet,  no  great  question  on  which  they  could  unite. 

At  this  moment  the  king's  luck  deserted  him.  There 
arose  a  cry  on  which  the  opposition  could  appeal  to  a 
sensitive  nation.  The  Popish  Plot,  a  tissue  The  Popish 
of  falsehoods  weaved  around  a  slender  thread  Dissolution! 
of  fact,  was  announced  by  a  depraved  villain  I6?8- 
named  Titus  Gates.  He,  and  others  like  him,  declared 
that  there  was  a  deep-rooted  plot  by  which  Roman 
Catholics  were  endeavouring  to  subvert  the  freedom  of 
the  country,  assassinate  the  king,  and  restore  England  to 
the  Papal  allegiance.  The  nation  was  alarmed.  The 
old  fears  of  the  French  alliance  and  the  Indulgence  had 
made  the  way  easy  for  such  a  panic.  Parliament  caught 
the  alarm,  Papists  were  hurried  to  execution  on  the 
slenderest  evidence,  and  the  opposition  leaders,  some  of 
whom  believed  genuinely  in  the  story,  fanned  the  flames. 
An  act  to  disable  Papists  from  sitting  in  either  house  of 
Parliament  was  passed.  As  if  to  show  where  the  real 
Popish  Plot  had  been,  the  secret  of  a  letter,  written  by 
Danby  at  the  king's  bidding,  in  which  the  English  am- 
bassador was  instructed  to  ask  Louis  for  money,  was  now 
made  public  by  Danby's  enemies.  The  old  Treaty  of 
Dover  was  as  yet  only  suspected.  The  minister  was  at 
once  impeached.  Charles  avowed  his  own  orders,  and, 
to  screen  his  too  faithful  servant,  dissolved  the  Cavalier 


82  A  REAL  DANGER  FOR  CHARLES. 

Parliament.  Louis  had,  for  the  moment,  the  game  in  his 
hands,  and  the  opposition  had  gained  a  case  to  lay  before 
the  country. 

In  the  fourth  period  of  the  reign  this  case  took  a  defi- 
nite shape,  and  led  dangerously  near  to  rebellion.  James, 
New  Pariia-  tne  king's  brother,  was  heir  to  the  throne,  for 
ment  and  Charles  had  no  legitimate  children.  He  was 
sition^  iviarch,  a  declared  Roman  Catholic,  and  had  recently 
l679-  married  as  his  second  wife  the  Princess  Mary 

of  Modena,  who  was  of  the  same  faith.  His  first  wife 
was  Anne  Hyde,  daughter  of  the  Chancellor  Clarendon, 
and  mother  of  James's  daughters,  Mary  and  Anne,  who 
were  afterwards  Queens  of  England.  With  the  Popish 
Plot  filling  men's  mouths,  an  army  still  on  foot  in  spite 
of  Parliamentary  demands  for  its  disbandment,  and  Louis 
XIV.  still  successfully  creeping  up  to  the  Rhine  frontier, 
it  was  not  difficult  for  the  opposition  to  raise  a  cry  that 
the  Protestant  Constitution  was  in  danger.  They  struck 
straight  at  the  one  idea  which  Charles  cherished  more 
than  his  ease  or  his  independence — the  hereditary  right 
of  his  family;  and  demanded  security  against  a  Popish 
successor.  Lord  William  Russell  led  in  the  Commons, 
while  Shaftesbury  represented  the  opposition  in  the  Lords. 
Charles  tried  to  divert  attention  from  James  by  adopting 
a  Protestant  foreign  policy,  but  when  Danby  pleaded  the 
royal  pardon  to  bar  his  impeachment  another  strong  case 
was  added  to  the  score  of  the  popular  party;  for  Parlia- 
ment declared  such  a  pardon  to  be  illegal.  At  last  there 
was  a  point  which  the  king  would  not  yield  and  could 
not,  by  shuffling  the  cards,  evade. 

At  this  critical  moment  Sir  William  Temple  brought 
forward  his  celebrated  scheme  intended  to  solve  the  ever- 
Tempie  to  the  recurring  conflicts  between  Parliament  and 
rescue,  1679.  the  crown.  He  proposed  that  the  Privy 
Council  should  be  reconstructed  and  made  a  sort  of 
mediator  between  king  and  Parliament.  It  was  to  con- 
sist of  thirty  members,  fifteen  royal  nominees,  and  fifteen 
members  of  the  Legislature.  They  were  to  advise  the 
crown,  and  no  step  was  to  be  taken  without  them. 


A   CANDIDATE   FOR   THE   THRONE.  83 

Charles  adopted  this  cumbrous  plan.  Many  of  his 
bitterest  opponents  were  made  members,  Shaftesbury  be- 
coming President.  The  king  now  hoped  to  stave  off  the 
succession  difficulty,  and  offered  extraordinary  securities 
for  Protestantism,  provided  the  Duke  of  York  was  allowed 
to  succeed  in  due  course.  All  holders  of  places  of  trust, 
together  with  the  military  and  naval  administration,  were 
to  be  approved  by  Parliament,  which  was  to  be  secured 
from  a  dissolution  at  the  time  of  the  king's  death. 

But  the  leaders  of  the  Opposition  were  not  to  be 
silenced.  They  rightly  concluded  that  such  safeguards 
were  illusory,  for  no  Parliament  can  bind  its  Exclusion 
successors;  and  in  May,  1679,  the  Exclusion  3111,1679. 
Bill,  to  prevent  the  succession  of  James,  was  produced. 
The  king  meant  to  go  to  all  lengths  to  prevent  this;  and 
therefore,  after  passing  the  celebrated  Habeas  Corpus 
Act,  which  secured  that  the  ancient  writ  to  enquire  into 
the  cause  of  imprisonment  should  not  be  evaded  by  legal 
officers,  his  third  Parliament  was  dissolved.  The  Council 
scheme  had  completely  failed. 

The  idea  of  Exclusion  involved  some  plan  for  a  suc- 
cessor other  than  James.  And  it  is  here  that  Shaftesbury 
and  his  party  made  their  greatest  mistake.  Monmouth's 
They  openly  proposed  to  seat  the  Duke  of  candidature. 
Monmouth,  one  of  the  many  natural  sons  of  the  king, 
upon  the  throne  of  England.  Monmouth  was  popular, 
and  had  gained  some  military  reputation,  having  just 
won  a  victory  over  the  extreme  Covenanters  in  Scotland 
at  Bothwell  Brig,  and  suppressed  a  very  dangerous  rising. 
There  were  not  wanting  agitators  who  spread  a  tale  of 
Charles's  marriage  with  Lucy  Walters,  the  young  Duke's 
mother.  This  the  king  emphatically  denied,  and  the  per- 
sistence of  the  Shaftesbury  faction  in  this  plan  brought 
about  a  split  even  in  the  ranks  of  the  Opposition.  Lord 
Halifax,  a  brilliant  and  adventurous  politician,  threw  in 
his  lot  with  the  government.  He  is  generally  known  as 
the  ''Trimmer",  for  he  loved  to  desert  the  winning  side 
and  thus  gratify  his  vanity  by  rectifying  the  balance. 
Russell  and  others  still  adhered  to  Shaftesbury. 


84  ORIGIN  OF   ENGLISH   PARTY   NAMES. 

Once  more  a  Parliament  was  elected  in  October,  1679, 
but  Charles  refused  to  summon  it,  and  for  a  year  the 
Whigs  and  members  never  assembled.  It  is  during  this 
Tories,  1680.  tjme  that  the  names  Whig  and  Tory  were 
first  given  to  the  two  parties.  Those  who  believed  in  the 
Popish  Plot,  and  wished  to  change  the  succession,  were 
derisively  compared  to  the  "Whigamores",  or  "Whigs",  a 
bitter  sect  of  Scottish  Covenanters.  Those  who  adhered  to 
the  Court  and  Divine  Right  were  styled  "Tories",  a  name 
by  which  the  outlawed  banditti  of  Ireland  were  known. 
The  Whigs  petitioned  for  a  summons  of  Parliament,  while 
the  Tories  arranged  counter-petitions  "abhorring"  the  idea 
of  altering  the  succession.  Thus  the  terms  "Petitioners" 
and  "Abhorrers"  were  also  used  to  describe  the  two 
factions.  Beneath  the  question  of  the  succession  lay  the 
great  dispute,  which  had  commenced  in  the  days  of  the 
Long  Parliament,  as  to  whether  the  nation  was  to  have  a 
personal  king  or  an  official  one.  For  it  was  practically 
the  same  thing  to  discuss  whether  a  nation  may  choose 
a  king  or  must  accept  a  distasteful  one  because  of  his 
pedigree.  The  Stewart  theory  of  Divine  Right  trembled 
in  the  balance,  as  that  of  the  Discretionary  power  of 
monarchs  had  in  the  days  of  Charles  I.  and  Laud.  The 
two  great  parties  had  a  different  view  of  the  question  of 
Sovereignty,  as  they  had  of  the  question  of  Toleration. 

In  October,  1680,  the  Parliament  at  last  met.  Charles 
tried  once  more  to  shelve  the  question  by  asking  for 
Rejection  of  unity  in  the  face  of  the  French  king's  advances 
the  BUI.  towards  the  Dutch  frontier.  But  men  saw 
through  this,  and  knew  that  he  probably  had  another 
letter  about  French  gold  ready  for  his  ministers.  Besides, 
Louis  had  been  careful  to  keep  up  the  quarrel,  for  he 
knew  England  was  a  dangerous  factor  in  European 
politics  if  it  was  united.  He  worked  up  the  fears  of 
arbitrary  government,  and  the  Exclusion  Bill  was  passed 
in  the  Commons.  In  the  Lords,  however,  Halifax  made 
a  brilliant  speech,  cutting  deeply  into  the  Whig  programme. 
The  two  Protestant  daughters  of  James,  Mary,  Princess 
of  Orange,  and  Anne,  were  excluded  by  Shaftesbury's 


REACTION   IN    FAVOUR   OF  CHARLES.  85 

scheme,  and  the   Lords,  taught  by  Halifax,  refused  to 
adopt  it. 

But  the  Opposition  could  not  now  retreat.  Already 
there  was  a  talk  in  Parliament  of  Toleration  and  Compre- 
hension, and  the  city  of  London  was  pledged  The  last 
to  the  Exclusion  Bill.  Charles  once  more  dis-  Parliament 
solved  Parliament,  and  summoned  a  new  one  March« l68r 
to  Oxford,  in  order  to  be  out  of  the  way  of  Shaftesbury's 
"  brisk  boys  ",  as  the  mobs  he  hoped  to  raise  were  styled. 
In  March,  1681,  this  Assembly  met  in  Christ  Church 
Hall.  The  Whig  leaders,  fearing  lest  they  might  be 
molested  in  that  home  of  Royalism,  came  with  armed 
followers,  an  unconstitutional  blunder  to  which  they 
largely  owed  their  ruin.  The  question  speedily  came  to 
an  issue.  Charles  offered  everything;  even  to  make  the 
Prince  of  Orange  Regent  during  his  brother's  lifetime, 
provided  the  title  of  king  were  reserved  to  the  latter,  who 
might  be  banished  from  the  kingdom.  This  was  clever, 
for  it  forced  Shaftesbury  to  rely  on  the  Duke  of  Mon- 
mouth  as  his  candidate.  Charles  refused  point  blank  to 
recognize  his  natural  son  as  heir  to  the  throne.  He  had 
split  the  Opposition  by  this  manoeuvre,  and  knew  that  he 
had  Louis'  gold  in  reserve,  for  the  latter  would  not  care 
to  see  a  new  government  under  Monmouth  and  Shaftes- 
bury pledged  to  a  Protestant  policy.  Louis  only  wanted 
Charles  to  quarrel  with  his  parliament,  and  would  pay 
either,  or  both,  so  long  as  they  were  not  on  speaking 
terms.  The  last  Parliament  of  King  Charles  was  at  once 
dissolved  after  one  week's  stormy  session. 

The  last  period  of  the  reign  witnesses  a  great  Tory 
reaction.     There  was  no  Parliament.     William  of  Orange 
came   to   ask   his   uncle's- help   against   the   The  turn  of 
French,  who  were  overrunning  Alsace,  but  the  tide- 
obtained  no  assistance.     The  Cavaliers,  who  feared  their 
church  policy  would  collapse  if  Shaftesbury  and  his  party 
obtained  power,  now  rallied  to  the  king.     To  prevent  the 
Dissenters  from  getting  a  footing  in  politics  they  were 
willing  to  keep  to  hereditary  succession,  just  as  their  an- 
cestors had  rallied  to  Charles,  rather  than  trust  the  Church 


86  CHARLES   CRUSHES  THE  WHIGS. 

to  Pym  and  the  Puritans.  The  entire  moderate  party 
were  more  alarmed  at  the  menacing  attitude  of  the  Whigs 
than  at  the  royal  army  which  Charles  maintained  or  at 
the  seizure  of  Strasburg  by  Louis  XIV.  Civil  war  was 
an  evil  they  never  meant  to  face  again.  Thus  there  was 
for  the  first  time  in  the  reign  no  need  for  the  king  to  give 
way.  He  had  not  to  choose  between  abandoning  his 
brother  and  "  starting  on  his  travels  ",  for  the  majority  of 
the  nation,  sensitive  as  they  were  about  Popery,  chose  for 
him.  James  they  considered  a  less  evil  than  civil  war. 

Thus  the  conditions  enabled  the  king  to  change  his 
tactics.  Instead  of  defending  hereditary  right,  which  men 

Attack  on  were  now  eager  to  do  for  him,-  he  was  able  to 
shaftesbury,  attack  its  assailants.  Shaftesbury  was  accused 
of  treason.  The  London  grand  jury,  to  the 
delight  of  the  Whigs,  threw  out  the  bill.  But  the  men 
who  now  advised  Charles — Sunderland,  Lawrence  Hyde, 
and  Halifax — were  determined  to  crush  their  opponents. 
London,  which,  by  adhering  to  Parliament,  had  ruined 
Charles  I.,  and  had  so  recently  proved  itself  a  stronghold 
of  the  Whigs,  saw  its  gates  thrown  down  and  its  privileges 
attacked.  On  various  trifling  pretexts  the  ancient  charter 
of  the  capital  city  was  confiscated,  and  was  only  renewed 
upon  conditions  which  ensured  a  subservient  corporation. 
A  similar  fate  was  meted  out  to  other  towns,  and  the 
great  centres  of  Dissent  and  Whiggery  were  thus  rendered 
harmless.  Meanwhile  Shaftesbury's  ill-advised  design  to 
appeal  to  arms  on  the  question  of  the  Succession  com- 
pleted the  ruin  of  the  already  discredited  Whigs.  Russell, 
Monmouth,  and  others  were  averse  to  such  an  extreme 
course;  and  Shaftesbury,  no  longer  able  to  rely  on  the 
adherence  of  London,  fled  to  Holland,  where  he  died  in 
1683. 

But  his  fiery  spirit,  which  had  already  ruined  the  move- 
ment, lived  on  in  a  more  desperate  body  of  men.  An 
The  Rye  attempt  was  made  by  some  extreme  membi-is 
House  Plot,  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Whigs  to  settle  the 
June,  1683.  whole  question  by  a  plot  to  assassinate  Charles 
and  his  brother.  The  plan — happily  an  abortive  one — 


DEATH   OF  CHARLES   II.  87 

was  to  waylay  the  victims  at  the  Rye  House  on  their  way 
from  Newmarket.  This  naturally  caused  all  who  had 
been  connected  with  the  recent  agitation  to  be  suspected. 
Russell  and  Algernon  Sydney  were  tried  and  executed, 
though  there  was  no  evidence  to  connect  them  with  the 
murderous  plan.  But  the  laws  of  treason  were  severely 
administered,  and  the  known  opinions  of  these  men,  evi- 
denced in  Sydney's  case  by  some  unpublished  writings 
declaring  the  right  to  resist  a  bad  king,  were  sufficient  to 
bar  all  hope  of  acquittal.  Monmouth  was  banished,  and 
the  great  agitation  which  had  threatened  to  sweep  away 
the  Stewart  theory  of  Divine  Right  was  at  an  end. 

In  the  moment  of  triumph,  when  four  years  had  elapsed 
without  a  parliament,  with  the  Opposition  discredited  and 
crushed,  the  skilful  victor  died.  The  Roman  Death  of  the 
Catholics,  for  whom  he  had  risked  so  much  kin£>  l68s- 
and  achieved  so  little,  had  the  satisfaction  of  receiving 
Charles  into  their  communion  on  his  deathbed.  As  he 
was  calm  and  collected  amid  the  crises  and  agitations  of 
his  political  life,  so  his  perfect  manners,  quiet  humour, 
and  unflinching  courage  in  the  midst  of  great  pain,  lasted 
to  the  end.  After  apologizing  to  those  who  stood  around 
for  the  "  unconscionable  time  "  which  he  took  in  dying, 
Charles  expired  on  February  6,  1685. 


CHAPTER   VIII. 
JAMES  II.:    1685-1689. 

James  came  to  the  throne  as  the  hero  of  a  victory 
which  others  had  won.  The  Whigs  were  crushed.  The 
attack  on  Hereditary  Right  was  now  but  an  „ 

,       .  ,.  i.  The  situation 

episode  in  a  discredited  movement,  the  cry 
of  a  fallen  party.     The  reaction  in  favour  of  monarchy 
was  as  complete  at  the  end  of  Charles'  reign  as  it  had 
been   in   1660.     Indeed  it  was,  in  a  sense, 
stronger,  for   it  was  the  result  of  a  double 


88  THE   NEW   KING. 

lesson:  the  threats  of  the  "Exclusionists"  had  reminded 
men  of  the  anarchy  of  the  Rebellion.  Yet  this  reaction 
was  not  at  bottom  so  much  in  favour  of  the  crown  as  for 
the  cause  of  peace. 

Louis  XIV.  was  now  paramount  in  Europe;  all  other 
nations  saw  a  menace  to  their  safety  in  his  illimitable 
claims  and  his  unscrupulous  raids.  Pope  and 
Emperor  alike  longed  to  check  him.  And 
one  stern  young  Prince  had  long  ago  set  his  face  like  a 
flint  towards  the  French  frontiers,  and  meant  to  stem 
the  tide  of  conquest.  William  of  Orange  had  a  double 
interest  in  England.  To  her  he  looked,  as  champion  of 
Dutch  independence,  for  that  assistance  against  France, 
without  which  his  determination  to  die  on  the  last  dyke 
was  likely  to  be  realized.  To  her  he  looked,  as  the 
Princess  Mary's  husband,  for  a  kingdom  whose  resources 
he  might  use  when  his  wife  should  in  due  course  become 
Queen. 

The  new  king  was    52   years  old.     He   was  a   hard 

worker,  a  man  of  business,  an  experienced  soldier,  sailor, 

and  administrator.     He  was  without  the  lazy 

James  char-  .  . 

acter  and  hesitancy  of  his  grandfather,  and  lacked  the 
aims.  noble  resignation  of  his  father,  while  he 

possessed  to  the  full  the  obstinate  belief  in  the  Stewart 
mission,  which  had  clogged  the  one  and  ruined  the 
other.  Moreover,  he  had  developed  the  Stewart  want  of 
tact  quite  as  much  as  his  brother  had  avoided  it.  In 
fact  he  had  a  great  deal  of  experience  with  none  of  its 
fruits.  No  character  could  make  a  man  more  unfit  to  be 
a  king.  When  he  persisted  in  a  wrong  course  it  was 
with  a  blind  infatuation.  What,  then,  was  he  likely  to  do 
with  the  grand  opportunity  to  which  he  succeeded? 

He  reigned  barely  four  years.  In  that  short  time  he 
managed  to  alienate  the  Church  of  England,  which  had 
Character  of  preached  Divine  Right  and  Non-Resistance 
the  reign.  for  nearly  a  century;  to  restore  the  Whig 
party  to  a  supremacy  which  lasted  for  upwards  of  80 
years;  and  finally  to  uproot  his  own  dynasty  from  its  firm 
hold  in  the  hearts  of  the  English  people.  Under  James 


SKETCH   OF  THE   REIGN.  89 

the  fear  of  a  Popish  king  vanquished  the  fear  of  a  civil 
war. 

The  reason  is  to  be  sought,  like  the  clue  to  most  of  the 
seventeenth  century  problems,  in  Religion ;  James  was  a 
bigoted  Roman  Catholic,  and  while  he  persecuted  to  the 
death  Presbyterians  in  Scotland,  he  determined  to  remove 
all  restrictions  on  the  political  and  religious  position  of 
the  Roman  Catholics  in  England.  The  laws  which  had 
been  passed  against  Nonconformists  of  all  sorts  fall  into 
two  clear  divisions.  First,  faejwtal  laws,  which  forbade 
and  punished  the  exercise  oftrierr~Te1igion ;  secondly, 
the  Tests,  which  refused  them  all  political  and  military 
office,  unless  they  denied  by  word  and  deed  their  dearest 
beliefs.  The  former  involved  religious  persecution,  the 
latter  political  death.  The  Penal  Laws  might  perhaps,  in 
a  short  time,  have  been  mitigated;  for  they  were  cruel 
and  bloody,  and  many  enlightened  men  disliked  them. 
Meanwhile  there  would  have  been  little  difficulty  in  using 
the  "Prerogative  of  Dispensing"  to  pardon  those  who  were 
threatened  with  the  more  terrible  punishments.  Gradually 
men  would  have  learned  that  punishment  for  religious 
opinion  is  no  part  of  man's  duty  to  man  or  to  God.  But  the 
Tests,  on  the  other  hand,  were  considered  by  the  majority, 
in  the  case  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  as  necessary  for  the 
national  safety;  and,  in  the  case  of  Protestant  Dissenters,  as 
a  useful  means  of  keeping  enemies  out  of  power.  James's- 
attempts  to  break  down  the  barriers  which  divided  his 
co-religionists  from  the  best  and  highest  places  in  the 
land  are  the  main  feature  of  his  reign.  Like  Charles,  he 
relied  on  Louis'  gold  and  on  an  army;  but,  unlike  Charles, 
he  had  no  idea  what  things  were  possible  and  what  were 
not.  James  pursued  his  schemes  till  an  exasperated 
nation  called  and  welcomed  his  nephew  and  son-in-law  to 
deliver  it.  Then  he  fled.  No  doubt  Toleration  was  a 
good  object,  but  Englishmen  had  reason  to  distrust 
Roman  Catholics,  who  aimed  -at  supremacy,  and  had 
perpetually  endeavoured  since  the  Reformation  to  over- 
throw the  government  by  conspiracy  or  by  open 
force. 


90  MONMOUTH'S  REBELLION. 

When  James  found  the  nation  resolute  against  his  plan 
he  endeavoured  to  carry  it  out  against  their  will  and  their 
laws.  Thus  the  Revolution  which  ensued  turned  on  the 
old  question — Is  the  king  a  personal  ruler  and  above 
the  law  of  the  land?  This  question  was  at  last  to  be 
•  answered  in  the  negative. ' «^- 

The  first  and  only  Parliament  of  the  reign  was  strongly 
loyal,  but  James  was  to  find  it  still  more  strongly  allied 
First  meeting  with  th.e  existing  form  of  church  government, 
of  Parliament.  The  king  promised  to  maintain  the  church 

May,  i68s  i   i  f  i          i       i       i  •       j 

and  keep  the  laws,  but  had  already  received 
a  large  present  from  Louis,  and  informed  that  king's 
envoy  that  he  relied  on  his  master's  help.  Parliament 
voted  a  large  increase  of  the -royal  revenue,  though  James 
had  been  taking  ungranted  customs.  There  was  but  one 
member  who  raised  his  voice  in  opposition  to  the  crown, 
and  he  gained  no  supporters. 

Already  a  rebellion  had  occurred  in  Scotland.  Archi- 
bald Earl  of  Argyle,  son  of  the  great  Covenanter  who  had 
Therisin  of  been  beheaded  in  1660,  had  landed  in  the 
Monmouth.  Western  Highlands  early  in  1685  to  rouse 
June,  1685.  n jg  countrymen  in  defence  of  their  religion ; 
but  the  scheme  was  badly  organized,  and  the  rising  was 
easily  suppressed.  A  far  more  dangerous  foe  was  now  in 
arms  in  the  South.  The  Duke  of  Monmouth,  the  natural 
son  of  the  late  king,  had  been  living  in  Holland,  where 
he  was  surrounded  by  many  refugees  of  the  old  Exclusion 
and  Whig  party.  Relying  on  his  undoubted  popularity 
in  England  he  now  landed  at  Lyme  Regis  (June,  1685), 
and  declared  for  a  free  Parliament  and  relief  of  Dissenters. 
He  received  no  support  from  the  Prince  of  Orange,  who 
was  not  likely  to  compromise  his  future  by  such  a  scheme. 
At  Taunton  the  invader  was  proclaimed  as  King,  but 
after  a  brief  moment  of  success  his  followers  were  cut  to 
pieces  on  Sedgmoor  (July  6).  He  was  captured  and 
executed,  after  a  piteous  appeal  to  his  uncle's  mercy. 
His  adherents,  and  all  who  had  been  concerned  in  the 
rising,  were  cruelly  punished  by  the  soldiers  of  Colonel 
Kirke  and  the  judicial  murders  of  Chief-justice  Jeffreys, 


A   STORMY   PROSPECT.  gi 

who  conducted  the  memorable  "  Bloody  Assize  "  in  the 
south-western  counties  with  reckless  blood-thirstiness. 

This  complete  victory  was  a  new  advantage  for  the 
crown.  Monmouth  had  corroborated  the  suspicions  of 
those  who  had  feared  the  "  brisk  boys "  of  Shaftesbury, 
and  a  third  object  lesson  had  thus  confirmed  the  loyalty 
of  all  moderate  men.  But  James  drew  the  wrong  lesson 
from  his  easy  victory. 

He  was  able  indeed  to  increase  his  army  as  a  measure 
of  security.  But  when  in  November,  1685,  the  second 
session  of  Parliament  opened,  it  was  found  Second  Ses. 
that  Halifax,  whose  tongue  had  saved  the  sion  of  Pariia- 
king  in  the  Exclusion  debate,  had  already  ment- 
been  dismissed  from  office.  James  had  appointed  Roman 
Catholics  to  military  posts  from  which  they  were  excluded 
by  the  Test  Act,  and  now  announced  to  Parliament  his 
intention  to  keep  them  there.  Halifax  had  refused  to 
vote  for  the  repeal  of  the  Act,  and  James  meant  to  get 
that  repeal  from  a  Parliament  of  zealous  churchmen. 
This  proved  to  be  quite  impossible,  and  thus  the  most 
loyal  Parliament  a  Stewart  ever  had  was  prorogued,  as  it 
proved,  never  to  meet  again. 

Yet  there  was  no  sign  that  the  king  would,  moderate 
his  course.  His  chief  advisers  were  Roman  Catholics — 
Father  Petre,  a  Jesuit,  Tyrconnel,  a  reckless  Formation  of 
Irish  noble,  and  others.  There  were  not  parties, 
wanting  men  who,  while  agreeing  with  James,  hoped  he 
would  not  rush  headlong  to  his  ruin  by  attacking  the 
church.  Many  moderate  Roman  Catholics  were  anxious 
to  see  him  hold  back,  and  Lawrence  Hyde,  Earl  of 
Rochester,  his  own  brother-in-law,  a  strong  Tory  and 
churchman,  led  a  milder  court  party.  But  already  there 
was  forming  an  opposition,  among  men  who  were  not 
inclined  to  take  the  royal  assurance  that  promises  should 
be  kept  as  a  sufficient  national  security.  Halifax,  Devon- 
shire, and  Compton,  Bishop  of  London  led  this  party. 
Thus  we  may  say  there  were  three  divisions — the  Jesuit 
cabal,  the  moderate  Court  party,  and  the  opposition. 
The  meaning  of  Roman  Catholic  toleration  and  the 

(962)  G 


92  THE  KING'S  RECKLESS   POLICY. 

reliance  to  be  placed  upon  royal  promises  were  being 
illustrated  just  now  in  France,  where  Louis  in  1685  re- 
scinded the  Edict  of  Nantes,  which  had  given  security 
to  French  Protestants  for  nearly  a  hundred  years.  This 
was  unfortunate  for  James,  since  it  quickened  the  sym- 
pathies and  the  fears  of  Englishmen. 

The  infatuated  king  meanwhile  determined  to  prevent 
Parliament  from  meeting  till  he  had  a  better  opinion  of 
Goddenv.  ^^  mtentions;  and  to  enlighten  them  he 
Hales.  June,  determined  to  get  his  power  to  dispense  with 
the  Test  Act  recognized  in  a  court  of  law. 
After  carefully  packing  the  bench  of  judges  with  men 
whose  servility  was  beyond  suspicion,  the  king  was 
gratified  by  a  favourable  verdict.  It  was  a  bogus  case. 
The  servant  of  a  Roman  Catholic  officer,  Sir  Edward 
Hales,  was  induced  to  sue  him  for  damages,  which  any 
informer  could  obtain  by  proving  that  the  Act  had  been 
broken.  The  king  had,  by  a  dispensation,  given  Hales 
leave  to  break  the  law.  Thus  the  question  to  be  decided 
was,  whether  such  a  dispensation  was  a  valid  defence  in 
law  against  the  claim  for  the  informer's  reward.  It  was 
decided  by  the  judges,  in  words  which  made  the  king  a 
present  of  the  English  constitution,  that  the  dispensation 
was  quite  valid.  This  dispensing  power  was  certainly 
legal,  but  Charles  II.  had  been  warned  by  Parliament 
that  it  was  not  looked  upon  with  any  favour,  and  James 
was  using  it  to  accomplish  an  object  which  he  had  not 
dared  to  ask  from  Parliament  rather  than  to  mitigate  the 
severities  of  the  ordinary  laws.  It  had  been  frequently 
used  to  save  men  from  the  rigours  of  the  penal  laws ;  but 
now  it  was  to  be  openly  used  to  evade  the  Tests. 

A  few  days  later  another  blow  was  struck  at  the  Con- 
stitution as  defined  by  Parliament.  A  court  of  Ecclesias- 
Revivai  of  ^ca^  Commission,  much  resembling  that  which 
High  commis- had  been  abolished  in  1641,  was  set  on  foot. 

>n  ourt.  james  wished  to  punish  Bishop  Compton  for 
refusing  to  suspend  the  Dean  of  Norwich,  who  had, 
contrary  to  royal  orders,  preached  against  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic faith.  The  powers  granted  to  this  royal  commission 


A  BAIT  TO  CATCH  DISSENTERS.  93 

were  the  old  spiritual  powers  wrested  from  the  Pope  by 
Henry  YIII.  James  was  not  afraid  to  put  back  our 
history  for  150  years  by  using  them  to  further  the  Papal 
cause  against  the  laws  of  England.  Compton  was  sus- 
pended from  his  sacred  functions.  Such  open  measures 
were  not  tamely  acquiesced  in,  and  least  of  all  by  the 
suspended  bishop,  who  was  not  of  a  submissive  turn  of 
mind.  Riots  occurred  in  London,  and  the  short-sighted 
king  established  a  large  camp  of  soldiers  under  carefully 
chosen  Popish  officers  on  Hounslow  Heath  to  keep  his 
capital  in  awe. 

A  futile  attempt  to  bend  the  Scots  Parliament  to  that 
submission  which  he  could  no  longer,  at  the  moment, 
expect  from  England  failed  to  show  the  king  A  change  of 
the  folly  of  his  course;  and  the  beginning  of  p°licy-  l687- 
1687  found  him  still  determined  to  go  on.  The  Hydes, 
Clarendon  (eldest  son  of  the  famous  chancellor)  and 
Rochester,  were  dismissed  from  office,  as  they  were  not  to 
be  induced  to  change  their  religion.  Clarendon,  who  had 
been  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  was  succeeded  by  the 
rampant  Romanist  Tyrconnel.  This  pointed  clearly  to  the 
complete  triumph  of  the  Jesuit  party  at  court.  But  it  was 
also  the  beginning  of  a  great  change  of  policy :  the  king 
had  tried  to  get  his  way  with  Parliament  and  with  the 
moderate  party,  represented  by  Tories  and  high  church- 
men; he  now  determined  to  dissolve  Parliament,  and 
rely  on  the  Dissenters  rather  than  on  the  Church  party. 
It  was  hoped  that,  if  he  offered  them  toleration,  they 
would  be  prepared  to  assist  him  against  the  church  by 
letting  him  raise  Roman  Catholics,  as  well  as  themselves, 
to  civil  and  military  office.  For  the  Dissenters  could  not 
be  expected  to  love  the  church,  whose  persecuting  sons 
had  shaped  the  "  Clarendon  Code"  of  1664.  James  also 
calculated  that  the  church,  pledged  to  the  doctrine  that 
it  was  sinful  to  resist  the  king,  might  be  insulted  with 
impunity;  though  it  might  sulk  it  would,  he  thought, 
never  rebel. 

In  accordance  with  this  new  plan  the  famous  Declara- 
tion of  Indulgence  was  issued  in  April,  1687.    The  penal 


I 

(J 


94  THE   BAIT   IS   REFUSED. 

laws  and  Tests  were  alike  suspended.  The  Parliament 
would  not  repeal  them,  so  the  king  did  so  himself. 
xhe"Deciara-  Roman  Catholics  and  Protestant  Dissenters 
tion".  were  relieved  of  their  civil  disabilities,  and 

allowed  the  free  exercise  of  their  religion.  Charles  II.,  in 
1672,  had  only  dared  to  suspend  the  penal  laws,  and  had 
been  compelled  to  give  up  the  attempt.  James  had  gone 
further,  and  in  defiance  of  the  clearest  expression  of  the 
national  opinion  had  set  himself  against  the  most  rooted 
prejudices  of  his  people.  The  question  seemed  no  longer 
to  be  whether  there  should  be  Toleration,  but  whether 
there  should  be  laws  at  all. 

All  now  depended  on  the  attitude  of  the  Protestant 
Dissenters.  If  they  were  willing  to  accept  a  Toleration, 
The  Dis-  which  the  king's  whole  life  proved  to  be 
senters.  insincere,  because  it  suited  him,  then  the 

cause  of  church  and  law  might  fall  together.  Some  of 
the  leading  Dissenters,  such  as  William  Penn,  the  Quaker, 
were  closely  allied  with  the  king.  But  many  notable 
Presbyterians,  especially  Baxter,  were  not  likely  to  believe 
in  the  royal  promises  or  desert  the  cause  of  national 
liberty  for  a  momentary  relief.  Halifax,  who  had  the 
keenest  intellect  of  the  day,  issued  a  pamphlet1  showing 
that  the  Dissenters,  who  were  to  be  "  hugged  "  now  that 
they  might  be  "  squeezed  "  later  on,  were  not  the  king's 
choice  but  his  refuge;  he  implored  them  not  to  accept  a 
brief  against  Magna  Carta  and  destroy  all  laws  in  order 
to  get  relieved  of  one.  They  had  a  better  chance,  he 
urged,  by  waiting  till  the  "next  probable  Revolution". 
The  Dissenters  were  true  to  the  cause  of  liberty,  and  in 
large  numbers  refused  to  show  their  preference  of  "  in- 
fallibility"  to  "liberty". 

By  way  of  attacking  the  English  Church  in  its  most 
vital  source  the  king  next  proposed  to  place  his  religion 
The  church  on  an  equality  with  Anglicanism  in  the 
attacked.  Universities.  The  laws  forbade  men  to  hold 
college  preferment  without  taking  the  oath  of  supremacy 
and  other  tests.  Already  Roman  Catholic  heads  had 

1  Letter  to  a  Dissenter,  1687. 


THE  SEVEN   BISHOPS'   PETITION.  95 

been  appointed  to  two  Oxford  colleges,  University  and 
Christ  Church,  and  the  vice-chancellor  at  Cambridge 
suspended  for  refusing  to  grant  a  degree  to  a  monk.  In 
the  summer  of  1687  James  insisted  that  the  Fellows  of 
Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  should  elect  as  their  president 
his  nominee.  When  they  resisted  he  secured  their  ex- 
pulsion, and  turned  the  college  into  a  "  Popish  seminary". 
Preparations  were  now  made  for  a  Parliament,  in  which 
the  king,  by  "packing",  hoped  to  secure  a  majority  for 
his  schemes.  But  the  attempt  to  obtain  promises  and 
subservient  candidates  was  a  failure.  And  the  astute 
Halifax  came  forward  to  show  that  the  king's  promise  to 
substitute  some  other  guarantee  for  the  present  laws 
against  Roman  Catholics  was  not  an  "  equivalent ",  since, 
if  he  did  not  respect  laws  which  were  already  made,  he 
would  not  respect  laws  which  were  yet  to  be  made.  The 
royal  anger  was  preferable,  urged  this  writer,  to  the  national 
ruin. 

In  the  year  1688  came  the  two  events  which  strained 
the  loyalty  of  the  nation  beyond  its  limits.     The  king's 
order    in    council    (May,    1688)    that     the   The  Crisis. 
"  Declaration "  should   be   publicly  read   in   l688- 
church  nerved  the  bishops  to  a  memorable  resistance. 
The  birth  of  an  heir  to  the  throne  in  June  led  all  classes 
of  Englishmen  to  look  over-sea  to  Holland  for  help,  since 
a  peaceful   change   upon  James'  death  was  no   longer 
possible,  after  the  appearance  of  a  Popish  heir. 

Sancroft,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  six  bishops, 
after  a  meeting  at  Lambeth,  signed  a  petition  to  James 
against  his  order  in  council.  Relying  upon  Trial  of  the 
their  determination  to  resist,  clergymen  in seven  bishops, 
all  parts  of  the  country  had  refused  to  read  the  Declaration 
in  compliance  with  that  order.  James  was  furious  at 
this  manifestation  of  hostility  where  he  had  expected 
obedience,  and  determined  to  prosecute  the  seven  bishops 
for  addressing  "  a  false,  malicious,  and  seditious  libel "  to 
their  king.  After  a  trial,  watched  with  breathless  interest 
by  the  entire  nation,  they  were  acquitted.  It  was  argued 
by  Somers,  a  young  Whig  lawyer,  that  the  subject  had  a 


96  THE  COMING  OF  WILLIAM. 

right  to  petition  the  crown,  and  that  the  document  in 
question  was  neither  false,  nor  malicious,  nor  seditious, 
nor  a  libel.  The  manifestations  of  delight  with  which  the 
verdict  was  greeted  in  London  and  the  country  would 
have  been  sufficient  warning  to  most  men.  Even  the 
soldiers  at  Hounslow  threw  up  their  hats. 

Almost  at  the  same  moment  a  letter  was  sent  to 
William  of  Orange,  inviting  him  to  come  and  deliver  the 
William  in-  land  from  the  galling  bonds  of  a  Popish 
fc«.d  j°unne  30,  ^^ce.  A  few  leading  men,  Devonshire, 
1688.  '  Compton,  Russell,  and  others,  signed  this 

letter  and  promised  a  favourable  reception.  The  task 
was  not  an  easy  one  for  William.  The  little  Prince  was 
not  believed  to  be  the  son  of  James  and  his  Queen ;  but, 
apart  from  the  revolutionary  movement  which  the  de- 
position of  a  tyrant  and  the  dispossession  of  his  heir 
William's  involved,  there  were  other  difficulties.  Wil- 
difficuities.  ijam  could  not  risk  a  battle  between  English 
soldiers  and  Dutch  troops,  which  would  have  stirred  the 
patriotism  of  all  people  against  a  foreign  invasion.  He 
could  not  leave  his  loved  Dutch  frontiers  at  the  mercy 
of  the  dragoons  of  Louis  XIV.  He  was  not  sure  that 
Tories  in  England  would  combine  with  Whigs  to  dispossess 
a  monarch  whom  they  considered  as  the  Lord's  Anointed. 
He  could  not  reckon  on  supplies  from  the  Dutch 
burghers,  many  of  whom  had  no  great  love  for  his  name 
and  his  house.  Yet  for  William  the  chance  had  come. 
James  could  go  no  further  and  the  iron  was  hot.  He 
determined  to  strike.  Louis,  who  wished  to  keep  James 
above  water  lest  England  should  be  united  and  strong 
enough  to  interfere  abroad,  was  nevertheless  short-sighted 
enough  to  send,  just  at  the  wrong  moment,  all  his  forces 
to  attack  the  districts  of  the  Upper  and  Middle  Rhine. 

Thus  relieved,  the  Whig  Deliverer  landed  at  Torbay, 
November  5,  1688.  James  had  made  some  efforts  at 
The  landing  conciliation,  but  to  little  purpose.  The 
of  William,  bishops  refused  to  exhort  the  nation  not  to 
resist  their  king.  In  a  short  while  the  invader  was  joined 
by  the  foremost  Whigs;  and  a  large  part  of  the  army, 


THE  REVOLUTION.  97 

under  the  influence  of  Churchill,  the  future  Duke  of 
Marlborough,  who  had  been  sent  to  Salisbury  to  oppose 
William,  deserted  the  Royal  cause.  As  the  invader  drew 
nearer  London  James,  after  sending  his  wife  and  child  to 
France,  endeavoured  to  follow  them ;  but  he  was  captured 
and  brought  back  to  the  capital.  AVilliam  had  not  claimed 
the  kingdom,  but  had  merely  declared  in  favour  of  a 
free  Parliament  and  Toleration,  with  a  maintenance  of 
the  Tests  and  other  bulwarks  against  Popery.  Nothing 
was  settled,  though  bloodshed  had  been  avoided.  The 
next  step  was  critical.  It  was  an  anxious  moment  for  all. 

James  was  told  that  he  could  not  stay  in  London,  and 
was  allowed  to  select  a  place  of  refuge.  He  chose 
Rochester,  and  promptly  fled  thence  to  France.  The  Revoiu- 
This  altered  the  character  of  the  Revolution.  tion> l688- 
Tories,  who  held  that  no  violence  to  a  king  was  possible, 
would  have  been  relieved  from  many  scruples  if  they  could 
honestly  have  considered  that  James  had  vacated  his  post. 
But  it  was  obvious  that  he  had  been  obliged  to  go,  and  it 
was  no  secret  that  he  was  in  fear  of  personal  violence. 
Thus  the  Revolution,  which  had  begun  in  an  alliance  of 
Whigs  and  Tories,  became  a  Whig  victory,  from  which  it 
at  first  appeared  that  all  true  Tories  must  stand  aloof. 
The  Whigs  held  that  a  bad  king  had  no  rights,  and  said 
as  much. 

William  took  the  government  into  his  hands  at  the 
invitation  of  the  peers,  who  advised  that  a  Convention 
Parliament  should  be  summoned.  The  surviv-  The  Conven- 
ing members  of  some  of  Charles  the  Second's  tion-  l689- 
Parliaments  were  also  called,  and  gave  the  same  advice. 
On  February  i,  1689,  this  memorable  assembly  met  at 
Westminster.  It  contained  in  the  lower  House  a  majority 
for  the  Whigs,  who  meant  to  change  the  succession.  But 
in  the  Lords  there  was  a  Tory  majority,  still  hampered  by 
the  difficulty  of  reconciling  their  theory  of  Non-Resistance 
and  Passive  Obedience  with  a  Revolution.  Some  were  for 
appointing  William  Regent  for  James,  while  others  argued 
that  James  was  dead  to  the  constitution  and  his  daughter 
Mary  was  already  Queen  by  hereditary  right.  Finally, 


98  THE  DECLARATION   OF  RIGHT. 

after  much  debate  and  many  searchings  of  heart,  it  was 
declared  that  James  having  broken  "  the  original  contract 
between  king  and  people  and  withdrawn  himself  out  of 
the  kingdom,  has  abdicated  the  government,  and  the 
throne  is  thereby  vacant".  The  scruples  of  the  Tories 
had  been  removed  by  William's  announcement  that  he 
would  go  home  unless  they  made  him  King,  and  that  he 
would  not  stay  here  as  his  wife's  "gentleman  usher". 
William  and  Mary  were  promptly  declared  King  and 
Queen  of  England. 

The  Revolution  was  a  compromise.    The  Whigs  secured 

the  insertion  into  the  Constitution  of  their  theory  that 

,    government  is  a  contract  and  not  an  heirloom 

Character  ot      P  .  ,,  , 

theconstitu-    in  any  family.      The  Tones  were  allowed  to 

tional  change.  makebdieve    that    jamgs    ha(j    left    them    no 

other  course  by  his  flight.  After  a  brief  discussion  about 
the  conditions  on  which  the  new  rulers  should  be  received, 
it  was  decided  to  draw  up  a  "  Declaration  of  Right ", 
which,  when  the  Convention  had  decided  to  continue  its 
own  existence  as  a  legal  Parliament,  was  passed  into  law 
as  the  "  Bill  of  Rights".  This  famous  document  asserted 
most  clearly  that  the  law  was  sovereign  in  England  by 
enumerating  the  acts  by  which  James  had  exasperated  the 
nation,  and  declaring  them,  one  by  one,  to  be  illegal. 
This  was  the  solution  of-  the  problem  Avhich  had  pressed 
for  an  answer  for  so  long.  Henceforth  there  could  be  in 
no  part  of  the  constitution  a  claim  to  set  aside  a  law  when 
duly  passed  by  King,  Lords,  and  Commons.  The  right 
to  act  in  virtue  of  a  "discretionary"  power,  which  was 
summed  up  in  the  words  Salus  populi  suprema  lex,  was 
to  be  heard  of  no  more.  The  motto  which  the  Stewarts 
had  tried  to  affix  to  the  English  constitution  must,  after 
the  Revolution,  be  read  Lex  suprema  populi  salus. 


WILLIAM   OF   ORANGE.  99 

CHAPTER   IX. 

WILLIAM     III.:     1689-1702. 

William,  Prince  of  Orange,  and  Stadtholder  of  the 
United  Provinces,  was  now  King  of  England,  not  as 
Mary's  husband,  but  together  with  her  as  the  The  new 
chosen  successor  of  James.  He  was  just  kin&- 
forty  years  old,  and  had  profited  by  his  experience  in  a 
way  that  was  to  make  him  able  to  rule  England  and  play 
the  foremost  part  in  European  politics.  It  has  been  said 
that  William  was  never  young.  He  had  been  born  and 
bred  amid  intrigues,  revolutions,  plots;  and  had  grown 
to  manhood  with  the  roar  of  French  guns  in  his  ears.  He 
was  cold  and  hard  in  manner,  had  wretched  health,  and 
was  personally  unattractive. 

His  ambition  had  been  to  make  himself  and  his  be- 
loved Holland  a  power  in  Europe,  and\his  chance  had 
been  so  opportunely  seized  that  he  now  hoped  . 

to  add  the  name  and  resources  of  England  to 
that  League  of  Augsburg  which  the  restless  Louis  XIV.  had 
roused  against  himself  in  1686.  The  Pope,  the  numerous 
German  princes,  the  Emperor,  and  the  King  of  Spain  had 
long  been  anxious  to  check  the  daring  monarch  who 
swooped  down  now  on  the  Pyrenees,  now  on  Italy,  now 
on  the  Rhine  or  the  Sambre.  If  William,  backed  by  the 
English  nation  and  the  English  navy,  could  lead  the  way, 
there  would  be  some  chance  of  making  headway  even 
against  so  great  a  power  as  that  wielded  by  Louis. 

The  austere  and  forbidding  nature  of  the  new  king  was 
thus  redeemed  by  one  splendid  passion,  love  for  Holland 
and  all  that  Holland  meant  upon  the  map  of  William  and 
Europe.  But  he  was  also  a  man  of  the  most  his  prospects 
dauntless  courage,  displayed  alike  on  the  field  1: 
and  in  the  council.  No  military  reverse  could  diminish 
it,  no  political  difficulties  limit  it.  And  he  needed  it  all. 
For  in  England  he  found  not  enthusiasm  or  reverence  for 


ioo  WILLIAM'S  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  deliverer,  but  much  treachery  and  more  distrust.  Only 
where  he  could  make  them  see  that  he  was  working  for 
their  own  immediate  interests,  or  when  Louis  put  a  trump 
card  into  his  hand  by  attack  or  insult,  did  the  English 
nation  rally  round  William.  They  were  jealous  of  his 
Dutch  favourites ;  they  knew  he  loved  the  gardens  of  Loo 
better  than  all  the  attractions  of  Kensington,  and  that  he 
neither  loved  nor  admired  Englishmen,  except  indeed 
when  he  watched  their  corpses  being  piled  beneath  the 
walls  of  a  French  fortress. 

But  more  than  this.     England  was,  so  far  as  concerns 

her  government,  in  a  stage  of  transition.      The  "king 

above  the  law  "  was  no  more.     But  the  "  law 

Changes  in  .  . 

the  English     above  the  king    was  not  a  condition  of  things 

constitution.     wWch  CQuld    be  ^^  substituted   for  the  old 

Stewart  theory  in  a  few  weeks.  Parliament  was  strong, 
and  divided  into  two  hostile  camps  of  Whig  and  Tory. 
The  Tories  disliked  William  and  felt  ashamed  of  themselves 
for  their  revolutionary  conduct.  The  Whigs  hated  the 
Tories  and  thought  William  should  follow  their  example. 
The  king  had  no  mind  to  become  a  tool  of  the  Whigs, 
and  hoped  to  keep  both  in  order  by  playing  one  party 
against  the  other.  But  he  could  only  do  so  by  retaining 
some  of  his  kingly  power,  and  thus  he  gave  some  sections 
of  both  parties  a  chance  to  combine  against  him.  Nowa- 
days the  sovereign  remains  in  the  background,  while  the 
ministries,  composed  on  strict  party  lines,  replace  each 
other  when  the  nation  is  dissatisfied  with  the  party  in 
power.  But  this  "Cabinet  government"  was  not,  in 
William's  day,  more  than  an  occasional  expedient,  and  the 
nation  had  not  yet  learnt  its  power  to  make  its  wishes  felt. 
Thus  Parliament  was  more  powerful  than  was  just  then 
desirable.  It  was  free  from  the  king,  without  being  subject 
to  the  nation.  The  king  could  only  manage  it  by  choos- 
ing ministers  whom  it  would  support,  thus  beginning  that 
system  which  is  now  always  in  operation — government  by 
a  cabinet  with  a  majority  in  Parliament  to  pass  its  measures. 
William  was,  throughout  his  reign,  obliged  to  rush  back- 
wards and  forwards  from  the  Dutch  frontiers  to  London, 


TREASON   OF   MANY   STATESMEN.  IOI 

to  work  a  machine  without  which  he  could  do  nothing, 
yet  which  frequently  thwarted  his  best  endeavours. 

His  greatest  difficulty,  however,  arose  from  his  own  in- 
secure position :  few  believed  that,  with  a  divided  nation, 
and  a  greedy,  watchful  enemy,  who  announced  Insecurit 
his  intention  by  word  and  deed  to  restore  the  breeds  trea- 
fallen  Stewart,  William  could  long  remain  King  son' 
of  England.  The  Jacobites,  as  the  adherents  of  James 
and  his  descendants  were  called,  were  powerful  and  alert. 
Every  victory  of  France  on  the  Continent  sent  a  thrill  of 
treason  through  the  English  politicians  who  watched  the 
great  game.  It  is  disappointing  to  find  statesmen  of  all 
shades  of  opinion  involved  in  this  treachery;  with  very  few 
exceptions  they  corresponded  secretly  with  James  at  St. 
Germains,  where  he  now  kept  up  regal  state  at  the  expense 
of  the  King  of  France.  William  knew  and  understood  this, 
and  it  is  not  the  least  part  of  his  title  to  fame  that  he  not 
only  refused  to  take  vengeance,  but  actually  contrived  to 
work  with  men  of  whose  letters  to  the  exile  he  had  copies 
in  his  hands. 

We  may  divide  the  reign  into  five  periods.  The  first 
two  years  (1689-1691)  were  occupied  with  the  settlement 
of  Scotland  and  Ireland,  for  James  and  Louis  periods  of 
made  a  great  attempt  to  keep  William  out  of  the  reien- 
their  path  by  giving  him  work  in  Ireland.  This  expedient 
would,  if  successful,  have  tied  the  king's  hands  very  effect- 
ually. But  all  fears  of  a  Jacobite  Ireland  were  allayed  by  the 
battle  of  the  Boyne.  From  1692  to  1695  William  struggled 
unsuccessfully  with  his  great  foe  on  the  Continent,  while 
he  contrived  to  keep  his  government  efficient  at  home  by 
intrusting  more  and  more  power  to  the  Whigs.  The  death 
of  Queen  Mary  marks  the  close  of  this  second  period. 
The  third  consists  of  two  years  (1695-1697)  in  which  the 
power  of  France  was  successfully  tired  out,  while  the  con- 
tinued domination  of  the  Whigs  secured  a  strong  war 
policy.  With  the  Peace  of  Ryswick  (1697)  the  nation, 
led  by  Tories,  ceased  to  support  William;  and  in  the 
fourth  period  (1697-1701)  his  parliaments  became  more 
and  more  unmanageable,  while  on  the  Continent  the  tardy 


102  THE  NON-JURORS. 

death  of  the  Spanish  king  raised  the  greatest  political 
problem  of  the  age.  Just  as  the  French  king  was  about 
to  seize  all  those  gains  which  the  English  jealousy  against 
William  was  pouring  into  his  hands,  the  death  of  James  II. 
occurred.  The  recognition  of  his  son  as  King  of  Eng- 
land, which  Louis  promptly  made,  once  more  stung  the 
English  into  a  warlike  temper.  The  fifth  period  (1701- 
1702)  therefore  shows  us  William  and  his  adopted  country 
again  at  one,  but  with  the  last  and  fiercest  struggle  still  to 
come.  At  this  moment  William  died. 

The  "  Convention  "  was,  at  the  commencement  of  the 
reign,  made  into  a  legal  and  competent  Parliament,  and 
Settlement  of  continued  in  session.  William  wished  to 
the  kingdom,  secure  a  moderate  settlement  of  religion  and 
finance,  so  that  all  faithful  men  might  serve  the  state  and 
the  state  might  be  strong  against  France,  But  no  such 
simple  solution  was  possible.  The  Toleration  Act  (1689) 
was  passed,  but  gave  only  relief  from  penal  laws  to  those 
Protestant  dissenters  who  were  prepared  to  take  the  oaths 
of  allegiance  and  supremacy.  No  tests  or  penal  laws  were 
done  away  with.  It  was  toleration  in  partial  practice 
without  the  principle.  There  was  no  chance  of  "com- 
prehension",— the  reconciliation  of  Protestant  noncon- 
formists to  the  Church  of  England — though  William 
wished  it  and  Convocation  discussed  it.  The  new  oath 
of  allegiance  to  William  and  Mary  was  made  compulsory 
for  all  officers  in  church  or  state,  and  those  who  refused  to 
take  it,  the  "Non-jurors",  as  they  are  called,  lost  their  posts. 
Bancroft,  the  hero  of  the  resistance  to  James's  Declaration, 
led  a  party  of  non-juring  bishops,  and  was  deprived  of  his 
archbishopric.  The  revenue  was  settled  on  William,  but 
Parliament  considered  it  necessary  to  assert  the  principles 
of  the  constitution  by  granting  it  only  for  one  year  at  a  time. 
The  Whig  section  now  began  to  show  a  violent  party 
spirit.  They  tried  to  secure  their  own  domination  by 
punishing  those  who  had  abetted  James's  illegal  acts,  espe- 
cially those  who  had  surrendered  the  charters  of  corpora- 
tions to  the  last  two  kings.  This,  together  with  their  re- 
sistance to  the  Bill  of  Indemnity,  which  was  to  pardon  the 


CONQUEST   OF    IRELAND.  103 

past,  caused  a  dissolution.  In  March,  1690,  a  new  Par- 
liament, with  a  larger  preponderance  of  Tories,  gave  the 
king  a  firmer  position  and  enabled  him,  to  some  extent, 
to  hold  the  balance  of  parties.  His  ministers  were  drawn 
from  both  sections,  the  chief  being  Godolphin,  Shrewsbury, 
Nottingham,  Halifax,  and  Danby. 

Meanwhile  in  Ireland  William's  presence  had  be- 
come necessary.  James,  assisted  by  the  French,  had 
landed  there  in  March,  1689;  and  at  once  the  national 
feeling,  so  long  repressed  by  the  system  which  The  struggle 
Cromwell  established  in  the  English  and  Pro-  in  inland, 
testant  interest,  sprang  to  life.  James  was  welcome  as  a 
Roman  Catholic,  but  the  Irish  thought  more  of  securing 
their  independence  of  those  who  had  taken  their  land 
and  proscribed  their  religion,  than  of  restoring  the  king. 
The  Protestants  intrenched  themselves  in  Londonderry 
and  Enniskillen,  while  the  Irish  Parliament  set  to  work 
to  undo  the  settlement  of  1660. 

Londonderry  was  relieved  in  July,  1689,  after  105  days 
of  siege  and  suffering ;  but  Marshal  Schomberg,  whom 
William  sent  over  with  a  small  army,  failed  to  secure 
Dublin.  Thus  in  June,  1690,  William,  who  then  landed 
in  Ireland  with  large  reinforcements,  had  to  face  the 
whole  rebellion  with  James  still  at  its  head.  With 
such  a  coward  as  James,  however,  the  issue  could  not 
long  be  doubtful.  The  decisive  battle  took  place  near 
Drogheda,  where  James  hoped  to  defend  his  position  be- 
hind the  Boyne.  The  river  was  crossed  and  the  position 
was  stormed  on  July  i,  1690.  James  fled  to  France  in 
craven  haste.  The  fall  of  Limerick  a  year  later  completed 
the  defeat  of  the  Irish.  Again  the  country  was  given  up 
to  the  Protestant  and  English  settlers,  who,  at  once,  more 
than  restored  the  system  of  1660,  and  utterly  excluded  the 
Roman  Catholics  from  political  power  and  social  con- 
sideration. 

The  French,  who  had  for  the  moment  a  sufficient  ad- 
vantage at  sea  to  make  communication  between  England 
and  Ireland  impossible,  had  not  managed  to  do  so.  But 
though  William  was  allowed  to  cross,  the  error  was  partly 


104  DUNDEE   IN   SCOTLAND. 

retrieved  by  their  occupation  of  the  Channel,  whence 
they  drove  Lord  Torrington  and  his  fleet  after  an  engage- 
The  struggle  ment. at  Beachy  Head,  June  30,  1690.  The 
in  the  Chan-  English  fleet,  though  chased  to  the  Thames, 
was  still  powerful,  and  as  the  cause  of  James 
in  Ireland  was  already  lost,  this  reverse  did  little  for  the 
Jacobites.  In  truth  there  ought  to  have  been  such  a 
French  fleet  in  existence  as  would  have  kept  William  in 
England,  enabled  James  to  hold  Ireland,  and  succoured 
the  Jacobites  in  Scotland. 

For  here,  too,  there  was  a  party  for  the  late  king.  The 
Covenanters,  forced  in  1660  to  submit  to  the  religious 
The  Scottish  government  they  hated,  had  risen  on  James's 
rising.  f^  an(j  jn  a  Convention  (March,  1689)  abo- 

lished Episcopacy  and  proclaimed  William  and  Mary. 
But  the  Highlanders  had  been  raised  in  the  Jacobite 
interest  by  Graham  of  Claverhouse,  better  known  as 
Viscount  Dundee,  who  roused  the  clans  that  hated  the 
Covenanting  tribe  of  the  Campbells,  the  great  supporters 
of  Whiggery,  to  fight  for  King  James.  They  won  a  battle 
at  Killiecrankie  Pass  in  July,  1689,  but  lost  their  leader, 
and  with  the  fickleness  that  Celtic  hosts  have  always 
shown,  they  at  once  dispersed.  William  endeavoured, 
when  this  formidable  rising  was  over,  to  settle  Scotland 
by  establishing  the  Presbyterian  form  of  church  govern- 
ment. His  efforts  to  stop  the  persecution  of  Episcopal 
clergy  were  in  a  great  measure  successful,  and  redound  to 
his  credit;  though  we  cannot  acquit  him  of  all  blame  for 
the  dastardly  way  in  which  the  Macdonalds  of  Glencoe 
were  murdered  in  the  beginning  of  1692.  Their  chief 
had  failed  to  comply  with  an  order  that  all  clans  were  to 
submit  to  the  government  by  January  i.  His  submission 
a  few  days  later  was  refused,  and  William  signed  an  order 
for  the  extermination  of  the  clan,  which  was  carried  out 
by  brutal  treachery  instead  of  by  military  execution. 

By  the  summer  of  1691  William  was  able  to  commence 
his  great  struggle  with  France.  The  allies  were  already 
in  arms,  and  some  fighting  had  taken  place  on  various 
parts  of  the  French  frontiers.  The  war  is  not  interesting, 


THE   FRENCH   FRONTIERS. 


I05 


106  BATTLE  OF   LA    HOGUE. 

for  it  consisted,  so  far  as  William  was  concerned,  in  a  stern 
struggle  to  keep  his  allies  true  to  their  promises  and  his 
character  of  Par^arnents  to  their  interests,  and  in  marching 
the  war  on  the  out  to  meet  the  French  armies,  which  were 
:nt'  personally  conducted  by  Louis  so  long  as  only 
sieges  and  no  battles  took  place.  For  when  he  could  not 
hold  a  brilliant  court  round  some  starving  garrison,  the 
French  king  left  his  generals  to  fight  the  King  of  England. 
As  William  was  a  very  unlucky  commander,  the  advan- 
tages he  secured  by  diplomacy  among  his  allies  and 
at  Westminster  were  not  infrequently  lost  when  he  faced 
a  French  army,  led  by  such  a  general  as  Luxembourg. 
But  though  often  out-manoeuvred  and  sometimes  routed, 
William's  true  greatness  always  appeared  more  splendidly 
in  defeat  than  in  victory.  Each  summer  a  campaign  took 
place,  and  it  was  merely  a  question  which  could  continue 
to  put  men  and  money  into  the  business  longest.  If  the 
alliance  broke  up,  or  the  Parliament  refused  supplies, 
William  must  lose;  if  France  sickened  with  exhaustion  he 
might  win. 

In  1691  William  arrived  on  the  frontiers  only  to  find 
that  the  fortress  of  Mons  had  passed  into  the  hands  of 
Campaign  of  the  French  king  (April,  1 69 1).  He  left  a  parlia- 
I69J-  ment  recently  nerved  to  vote  supplies  by  the 

burning  of  Teignmouth,  which  had  followed  the  naval 
defeat  of  Beachy  Head.  But  a  network  of  Jacobite  in- 
trigue was  spreading,  and  while  men  like  Russell,  the 
seaman,  and  Marlborough,  the  soldier,  were  content  with 
sending  their  expressions  of  fluty  and  service  to  James,  the 
more  active  members  of  the  party  prepared  plans  for  a 
rising,  while  on  the  French  shores  armies  were  being 
collected  for  an  attack  upon  England. 

In  May,  1692,  the  French  fleet  was  beaten  and  de- 
stroyed off  Cape  La  Hogue  by  Russell,  who  was  not 
campaign  of  ashamed  to  write  letters  to  James  pleading 
^692,1693.  the  excuse  that  his  professional  reputation 
was  at  stake  in  the  matter.  The  descent  upon  England 
was  thus  put  out  of  the  question.  This  was  a  sufficient 
revenge  for  the  defeat  at  Beachy  Head,  and  France  gave 


THE   BANK   OF   ENGLAND.  107 

us  little  more  trouble  by  sea.  Meanwhile  the  French 
king  and  his  court  were  watching  the  siege  of  Namur, 
which  surrendered  in  June,  1692.  William,  who  arrived 
too  late  to  save  it,  was  then  badly  beaten  by  Luxembourg 
at  Steenkerke  (August,  1692).  A  second  serious  defeat  at 
Landen  in  the  following  July  brought  the  military  pros- 
pects of  the  Allies  very  low. 

7s  But  in  England  matters  were  improving.  The  factious 
/  spirit  in  Parliament  was  shown  when  the  Whigs,  jealous  of 
/  the  Tories,  proposed  the  Triennial  Bill,  which  whi  s  ain 
would  put  an  end  to  William's  plan  of  getting  ground,  1693- 
l  a  ministry  to  manage  the  Parliament  for  as  l694' 
\long  a  time  as  he  could.  A  general  election  every  three 
years  would  give  the  party  out  of  power  a  better  chance ; 
the  bill  was  passed,  but  was  rejected  by  William,  who  thus 
exercised  his  legal  power  of  refusing  to  assent  to  a  bill. 
But  the  Whigs  were  too  strong  to  be  neglected,  and,  as  a 
compromise,  their  champion  Somers  was  made  Lord 
Keeper  of  the  Seal,  while  the  Tory  Nottingham  had  to 
resign.  Sunderland,  who  was  able  to  give  good  advice, 
though  unable  to  keep  true  to  any  principles,  suggested  to 
William  to  make  a  united  Whig  ministry,  and  so  keep  his 
Parliament  in  good  humour.  The  Tories,  who  had  been 
in  the  ascendant  for  the  last  few  years,  were  losing  ground. 
They  had  no  hearty  belief  in  the  war,  and  their  lack 
of  energy  in  its  conduct  was  a  source  of  failure.  The 
Whigs  were  also  fortunate  in  securing  at 'this  time  the 
strongest  support  they  ever  had,  the  commercial  interest 
-  of  England;  not  only  those  merchants  whose  ships  had 
been  lost  when  in  1693  the  Smyrna  fleet  was  captured  and 
its  convoy  dispersed  by  the  French;  but  all  those  who 
were  concerned  in  the  new  financial  expedients.  For  it 
was  an  age  of  financial  expedients;  a  young  and  clever 
Whig  named  Montague  had  succeeded  in  raising  loans  for 
the  war  expenses  by  setting  up  the  Bank  of  England.  This 
meant  that  a  body  of  men  who  negotiated  the  loans  received 
from  government  privileges,  by  which  they  were  enabled 
to  secure  a  practical  monopoly  of  the  lucrative  business 
of  money-lending.  The  Tories  soon  grew  jealous  of  this 

(962)  H 


Io8  DEATH   OF  QUEEN    MARY. 

power.  For  it  played  into  the  Whig  hands  by  firmly 
attaching  those  men  who  lent  the  money  to  the  govern- 
ment, from  which  alone  they  could  hope  for  payment. 
They  tried  to  secure  similar  advantages  by  what  is  known 
as  the  Land  Bank.  This  was  an  absurd  scheme  for  mak- 
ing money  by  the  wholesale  lending  or  mortgaging  of  land: 
but  as  many  people  wanted  to  borrow  money  and  few  to 
borrow  land,  the  Bank  of  England  won  the  day,  and  soon 
became  a  powerful  and  important  Whig  institution. 

With  Montague  chancellor  of  the  exchequer,  and  his 
financial  success  on  every  tongue,  the  campaign  of  1694 
The  whig  was  opened;  nothing  beyond  an  unsuccessful 
successes.  attack  upon  the  French  harbour  of  Brest  need 
be  mentioned.  The  Whigs  were  able  to  secure  the  Tri- 
ennial Act,  for  William  did  not  care  to  veto  it  a  second 
time;  it  looked  as  if  the  war  would  be  waged  with  vigour, 
and  the  party  strife  at  home  be  ended  by  the  domination 
of  the  Whigs  and  the  war  party. 

At  this  moment  a  great  blow  fell  upon  William.  His 
wife,  to  whom  he  was  sincerely  attached,  died  suddenly 

Death  of      of  small-pox  in  December,  1694.     This  blow, 

Mary-  from  which  it  seemed  at  first  as  if  the  king 
himself  would  scarcely  rally,  for  a  time  seriously  menaced 
his  political  position.  Mary's  presence  upon  the  throne 
of  her  ancestors  had  in  fact  been  a  rallying  point  for 
Tories  and  High  Churchmen.  It  had  been  the  means 
of  securing  a  larger  number  of  adherents  for  government, 
both  in  and  out  of  Parliament,  than  could  have  been 
hoped  for  had  William  been  without  the  much-needed 
aid  of  her  popularity,  sweet  temper,  and  good  sense.  But 
the  fall  of  Danby,  one  of  the  last  surviving  Tory  ministers, 
who  was  at  this  time  accused  of  receiving  bribes  from  the 
East  India  Company,  brought  the  Whigs  further  to  the 
front,  and  their  combination  was  strong  enough  to  stand 
the  strain. 

The  third  period  of  the  reign  was  the  most  successful 
for  William.  Godolphin  was  now  the  only  Tory  minister. 
Mary's  sister,  the  Princess  Anne,  who  had  been  estranged 
from  the  court  by  the  jealous  intrigues  of  her  friend  the 


FENWICK'S  ASSASSINATION  PLOT.  109 

Countess  of  Marlborough,  was  now  reconciled  to  Wil- 
liam; though  Marlborough  was  in  disgrace  owing  to  his 
dealings  with  St.  Germains.  Great  financial  vigorous 
efforts  were  made,  and  in  August,  1695,  policy  at  home 
William  had  the  satisfaction  of  retaking  Na- a 
mur.  With  this  decided  success  to  back  him  the  king 
returned  and  dissolved  Parliament,  with  a  view  to  gaining 
a  further  Whig  success  in  the  elections.  He  made  a  real 
effort  to  secure  personal  popularity  by  making  a  "pro- 
gress "  through  the  country,  visiting  large  towns,  and 
staying  in  the  country  houses  of  important  men.  The 
Whigs  were  largely  victorious  at  the  polls,  and  a  liberal 
war  grant  followed.  But  there  was  also  plenty  of  work 
to  be  done  at  home.  A  bill  to  make  trials  for  high 
treason  more  humane,  by  allowing  the  prisoner  to  have 
the  same  legal  advantages  as  in  other  trials,  was  passed. 
The  Whig  financiers,  Somers  and  Montague,  assisted  by- 
Locke  and  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  carried  through  a  much- 
needed  scheme  for  amending  the  coinage.  A  sound 
currency  is  the  condition  of  a  sound  commerce,  and  the 
Whigs,  who  were  supported  by  the  "monied  interest", 
replaced  the  old  thin  and  clipped  silver  by  new  and 
thicker  coins  of  full  weight. 

The  French  were  not  inactive,  in  spite  of  the  fall  of 
Namur  and  the  death  of  their  best  general,  Luxembourg. 
Louis  was  willing  to  assist  any  rising  in  Eng-  Jacobite 
land,  and  James's  illegitimate  son,  the  Duke  troubles, 
of  Berwick,  crossed  the  Channel  in  disguise.  But  he 
found  that,  like  the  French,  the  English  Jacobites  wished 
to  see  the  others  make  the  first  move.  There  was  no  general 
rising,  and  Louis  was  too  business-like  a  plotter  not  to 
require  something  solid  for  his  money.  Early  in  1696, 
however,  a  plot  was  formed  among  some  desperate  men 
to  attack  and  murder  William  when  he  went  hunting  at 
Richmond.  Fortunately  a  large  party  had  to  be  enrolled 
in  order  to  overcome  his  guards,  and 'there  was  a  fair 
sprinkling  of  traitors  among  these  would-be  assassins. 
The  plot  was  betrayed,  and  the  result  was  all  in  William's 
favour.  An  association  was  formed,  and  swore  to  defend 


110  PEACE  OF    RYSWICK. 

the  king  and  maintain  the  succession  of  the  Princess 
Anne.  Thus  the  Whigs  won  all  along  the  line,  and  in 
1697  William  had  a  completely  Whig  ministry,  a  fairly 
loyal  nation,  and  a  Parliament  ready  to  work  with  the 
government. 

It  was  now  clear  that  France  was  terribly  exhausted  by 
the  gigantic  efforts  she  had  made  to  keep  up  the  war 
Peace  of  along  her  entire  frontier.  The  King  of  Eng- 
Ryswick.  land  might  therefore  take  advantage  of  this 
either  to  secure  a  peace  or  to  strike  a  blow.  The  former 
would  disarm  his  foes  at  home,  who  relied  upon  French 
assistance,  and  William  opened  negotiations.  It  was 
finally  arranged  that  the  French  king  should  recognize 
William  as  King  of  England  and  Aane  as  his  successor. 
He  was  to  give  up  all  that  he  had  taken  or  conquered  since 
the  peace  of  1678,  with  the  important  exception  of  Stras- 
bourg, which  he  insisted  on  retaining.  (Sept.  10,  1697.). 

The  retention  of  this  fortress  was,  however,  a  very  trifle 
compared  to  the  enormous  accession  of  territory  that 
Spanish  Louis  hoped  to  acquire  on  the  death  of 
succession  Charles  II.  of  Spain.  It  was  now  plain  that 
the  feeble  life  of  that  monarch  was  drawing 
to  a  close,  and  Europe  was  awed  into  a  calm  at  the 
thought  of  the  vastness  of  the  issues  at  stake.  It  was 
during  this  calm — the  fourth  period  of  the  reign — that 
Louis  and  William  endeavoured  to  avert  the  threatening 
storm,  by  a  scheme  for  the  Partition  of  the  hereditary 
dominions  of  the  Spanish  crown.  There  were  numerous 
claimants,  but  the  great  question  lay  between  the  Imperial 
or  Austrian  house  arid  that  of  the  Bourbons.  The  three 
royal  houses  of  Spain,  France,  and  Austria  were  united 
by  various  complicated  intermarriages.  But  so  far  as 
blood  was  concerned  the  Dauphin  had  a  clear  right  to 
the  whole  Spanish  dominion,  consisting  of  Spain,  the 
Indies,  Sicily,  Naples,  Milan  and  the  Netherlands.  The 
danger  of  so  great  an  accession  of  power  to  France  had 
long  been  foreseen,  and  by  the  Treaty  of  the  Pyrenees 
(1659)  Louis'  wife  had  renounced  all  rights  for  herself 
and  her  descendants.  The  Dauphin's  claim  was  there- 


THE  SPANISH  SUCCESSION. 


Ill 


n 

-£w§§"«                                  2    K/ 

°  %«    s                       a  b 
^ew*   o                         5  x 

u  i 
~w  S 

X  2 

||          CA 

x  td 

B  „ 

Q   u 

«  < 

5       J 

g  S 

g  < 

J 

"*< 

K    V 

g1*1 

U 

*"£. 

II  — 

~"  s 

a 

S                                   'Z 

K 
O 

b 

n 

O 

a 

N 

HH 

CO 

1          ^ 

j 

CO 

(4 

h                      w 

g*              0 

«                         u 

W           « 

o 

CO 

_w                              u 

—          o 

*    V 

H 

Pi 

1                                                              § 

l-H                      ^ 

"              id 
J 

-11 

1(1 

fe 

a 

2              W 

W 

CO 

2              ~^ 

H 

CO 

5 

O               ". 

«              M        < 

N 

K     - 

ta     < 

u                                 <! 

«                                         CO       S 

0                               W     "- 
o                               ffi      3 

£      3   §  ? 
II  —  g    3     o 

_s       S   «   £ 

<          J      li     _     . 

s       u-  -s  §; 

0      H. 

<                                       ft 

3    S     3  *S 

> 

j     5             £ 

^.         B         11   "O 

w      h     M  .a 

§ 

~                                                              >—  1 
^                 <                                          1 

H—  3              ^ 

Ctf        ^       -^-  Q 
<;       W       « 

§    M     j           ^ 

•<          -•          M           3    C 

a 

2 

-5        >                   X 

i  •!          w 

3      5      o       o-  = 

1  s  <?! 

w 

2                  0 

'  —  n 

o 

1                     H 

fe 

fc> 

«. 

^       's 

J.J* 

pM 

2       IS 

K  'J-j 

8_ 

pQ 

5; 

§        | 

PH^ 

3 
< 

E 

i-i         w                     H 

6.  

Tl       ° 

II  - 

u 

M        —  §                                                             K 

<  a     B 

—  |—       •< 

—  5  K    j 

T3 

^i 

^  s 

C 

"cT 

—.                          Q^ 

H 

hjQ       **" 

•3 

'F    *-§ 

g     X 

M 

*O       ^  c 

—  pq  —  uj 

•6 

^ 

*"*              W  u       H  v 

M                                               °            O 

> 

<«   ~*l~a* 

M 

« 

W                    H-_P^            W 

~K                   2        Kg 

"l!    ^ 

112  THE   FIRST  PARTITION  TREATY. 

fore  barred  by  international  agreement.  The  Emperor 
Leopold  I.  had  a  claim  through  his  mother,  which, 
though  not  so  good  by  pedigree,  was  hampered  by  no 
renunciation.  A  third  claim  passed  to  his  daughter,  the 
Electress  of  Bavaria,  through  her  mother,  the  younger 
sister  of  Charles  of  Spain,  but  this  was  also  barred  by 
a  treaty.  The  houses  of  Austria  and  France  were 
each  bound  to  resent  so  great  a  windfall  coming  to 
the  other.  The  young  Electoral  Prince  of  Bavaria  re- 
presented a  third  party,  whose  accession  to  the  crown  of 
Spain  would  at  least  keep  out  the  direct  heirs  of  both  the 
rival  powers.  And  it  was  upon  him  that  the  great  inher- 
itance was  settled  by  the  famous  First  Partition  Treaty, 
First  arranged  between  William  and  Louis.  Eng- 

Partition,  Hsh  interests  were  concerned,  inasmuch  as  the 
union  or  close  alliance  of  Spain  and  France 
would  be  practically  a  veto  upon  English  trade  and  com- 
merce in  the  New  World  and  the  Mediterranean.  Louis 
was  anxious  to  keep  Austria  from  the  inheritance,  and  to 
secure  a  further  slice  of  European  territory  without  fight- 
ing for  it.  This  arrangement,  therefore,  gave  the  Indies, 
Spain,  and  the  Netherlands  to  the  Bavarian  prince.  French 
ambition  was  allayed  by  the  offer  of  Naples  and  Sicily, 
together  with  a  small  part  of  the  north  of  Spain  (Gui- 
puscoa).  The  Archduke  Charles,  Leopold's  younger  son, 
received  the  Duchy  of  Milan.  This  seemed  a  fair  way- 
out  of  the  terrible  dilemma,  but  scarcely  was  it  settled 
when  the  Bavarian  prince  died  of  small-pox,  and  the 
whole  negotiation  was  rendered  useless. 

William  had  in  his  hands  the  whole  management  of 
these  puzzling  continental  politics,  but  his  next  efforts  to 
Reaction  in  settle  the  matter  out  of  court  were  cramped 
England.  by  the  condition  of  affairs  at  home.  No 
sooner  was  the  Peace  of  Ryswick  signed  than  the  Eng- 
lish nation  ceased  to  support  him.  The  tension  of  the 
continental  struggle  once  over,  a  reaction  began.  The 
national  fear  and  jealousy  of  a  standing  army  broke  out 
fiercely.  There  were  three  reasons  why  such  a  force  was  no 
longer  dangerous  as  of  old.  William  was  not  a  James  II., 


FAILURE  OF  WILLIAM'S  POLICY.  113 

and  had  no  quarrel  with  English  laws.  The  rapacity 
of  Louis  made  it  absolutely  necessary  to  treat  with  him 
sword  in  hand.  The  Mutiny  Act  (1689),  by  which  Parlia- 
ment granted  special  disciplinary  powers  over  the  army, 
was  annually  passed,  and  could  be  refused  if  the  Houses 
had  cause  to  distrust  those  who  maintained  the  army. 
Without  such  powers  no  army  could  be  kept  in  order. 

But  a  Tory  reaction  was  in  progress,  and  the  magnifi- 
cent forces  of  William  were  reduced,  to  7000  men.  The 
favourite  Dutch  guards  were  sent  home,  though  the  king 
made  a  pathetic  appeal  to  be  allowed  to  retain  them. 
The  expenses  of  the  late  war  gave  the  Tories  a  handle, 
and  they  insisted  on  resuming  large  grants  of  crown 
lands  which  William  had  foolishly  given  in  some  profusion 
to  Dutch  favourites.  Men  thought  more  of  the  taxation 
which  would  follow  a  fresh  outburst  of  war  than  of  making 
such  war  impossible  by  a  bold  policy. 

The  death  of  Joseph  of  Bavaria  made  necessary  a 
Second  Partition  Treaty,  in  which  Louis  found  much 
advantage.  The  Archduke  Charles  was  made  second  Parti- 
heir  to  Spain  and  the  Netherlands,  which  were  tion>  I7°°- 
both  far  enough  from  Austria  to  make  this  increase  of 
Hapsburg  power  unimportant.  Louis  still  received  for  his 
son  Naples  and  Sicily,  as  well  as  Milan,  which  he  hoped  to 
exchange  for  Lorraine,  a  province  long  since  practically 
his  own  by  right  of  theft  and  occupation. 

Hardly  was  this  arranged  when  the  unhappy  prince, 
whose  dominions  were  thus  meted  out,  died  in  the  Escu- 
rial,  November,   1700.      He  had  been  per-      Failure  of 
suaded  at  the  last,  by  those  who  succeeded  in      William's 
gaining  influence  over  his  weak  and  tortured      po  lcy> 
mind,  to  make  a  will,  by  which  all  his  dominions  were  to 
pass  to  Louis'  grandson,  Philip,  Duke  of  Anjou.     Thus 
for  a  second  time  the  labours  and  cares  of  months  were 
thrown  away,  and  Louis,  lightly  breaking  his  treaty  and 
his  promise,  accepted  the  will.      The  Pyrenees,  as  he 
proudly   boasted,   existed   no   longer,    and   all   Western 
Europe  had  become  the  heritage  of  the  Bourbons. 

To  William  this  was  a  severe  blow.     But  the  English 


114  THE   ACT   OF   SETTLEMENT. 

people  refused  to  share  his  alarm.  The  Partition,  with 
its  addition  to  French  power  in  the  Mediterranean,  was 
unpopular  among  the  merchants,  and  they  had  little  fear 
of  a  future  policy  so  united  on  the  part  of  France  and 
Spain  as  to  menace  Europe  in  general  or  English  ships  in 
particular. 

This  was  the  darkest  moment  in  William's  reign.  He 
had  been  tricked  abroad,  humiliated  at  home,  and  there 
The  lowest  appeared  no  way  out  of  the  difficulty.  More- 
ebb,  over  a  succession  difficulty  seemed  about  to 
threaten  in  England  itself.  Anne's  only  son,  the  Duke 
of  Gloucester,  died  in  1700;  and  as  William's  health  was 
daily  failing  a  new  scheme  of  succession  was  absolutely 
necessary  if  Jacobite  hopes  were  to  be  disappointed. 
Long  ago  it  had  been  suggested  that  the  crown  should 
pass,  after  the  death  of  Anne,  to  the  family  of  Sophia, 
Electress  of  Hanover,  who  was  a  granddaughter  of 
James  I.1  The  Act  of  Settlement  (1701)  made  this  into 
law,  and  thus  completed  the  work  of  the  Revolution. 
The  crown  was  to  be  strictly  hereditary  in  the  Hanoverian 
family,  provided  they  were  Protestants.  At  the  same 
time  the  independence  of  the  judges  was  secured;  they 
were  now  to  be  removed  only  after  an  address  from  both 
Houses  of  Parliament,  and  several  other  important  con- 
stitutional provisions  added.  But  strong  jealousy  of  the 
Dutch  king  and  his  favourites  was  still  shown.  The  fears 
of  William  were,  however,  speedily  justified.  By  the 
Peace  of  Ryswick  Dutch  soldiers  were  allowed  to  garrison 
certain  fortresses  on  the  frontiers  of  the  Netherlands,  since 
Spanish  troops  were  neither  efficient  nor  trustworthy. 
Louis  in  1701  occupied  these  "Barrier  Fortresses",  and 
thus  once  more  showed  his  contempt  for  the  public  law 
of  Europe. 

There  was  now  no  means  of  sairking  the  question  of 

Part  struggle  war>     ^e  commercial  interest  was  alarmed 

in  England,     and  party  strife  ran  high.     The  Tories  were 

not  inclined  to  yield  their  position  when  the 

war  feeling  began.     They  impeached  four  members  of 

1  See  p.  in- 


DEATH   OF   KING   WILLIAM.  1 15 

William's  government,  and  imprisoned  some  freeholders 
who  presented  the  "  Kentish  Petition  "  in  favour  of  war. 

But  for  William,  though  he  had  been  obliged  to  yield 
his  dearest  plans  and  see  his  efforts  thwarted,  fate  had  one 
triumph  in  store.  In  September,  1701,  James  Louis  insults 
II.  died  at  St.  Germains.  "The  French  king  England, 
had  really  only  one  more  solemn  engagement  left  to 
break.  He  seized  this  opportunity  to  break  it,  and  osten- 
tatiously recognized  James's  son,  the  Pretender,  as  King  of 
England.  This  was  enough  to  complete  the  overthrow  of 
the  Tories  and  to  give  William  the  enthusiasm  he  wished 
to  rouse.  Parliament  was  dissolved  amid  national  clamours 
for  war  against  the  French.  The  Whigs,  who  gained  the 
advantage  at  the  polls,  voted  supplies  and  passed  a  bill  to 
secure  the  Protestant  succession.  Once  more  the  king 
had  the  English  behind  him.  But  for  William  there  was 
to  be  no  part  in  the  mighty  struggle  which  was  now  to 
break  the  power  of  his  foe,  and  raise  English  arms  and 
an  English  general  to  the  highest  pinnacle  of  military 
glory.  A  fall  from  his  horse  stretched  him  on  a  bed  of 
sickness  from  which  he  never  moved.  At  the  very  mo- 
ment when  one  animated  by  a  life-long  passion  for  war 
against  France  would  have  most  cared  to  live,  William 
breathed  his  last  at  Kensington,  on  March  8,  1702. 


CHAPTER   X. 

ANNE:    1702-1714. 

Anne,  the  younger  daughter  of  James  II.  by  his  first 
marriage,  became  queen  on  William's  death  by  the  express 
terms  of  the  Revolution  settlement.    She  was      The  new 
likely  to  be  popular,  for  she  was  a  Stewart,      queen, 
and  yet  a  sincere  member  of  the  Anglican  Church.     The 
Tories  would  see  in  her  a  representative  of  the  family 
whose  misdeeds  they  were  so  anxious  to  forgive.     The 
Whigs  would  approve  of  a  queen   succeeding  by  laws 


Il6  PERSONAL  CHARACTER  OF  ANNE. 

framed  against  the  enemies  of  England's  liberties.  She 
was  a  good  woman  without  much  will  of  her  own.  Thus 
it  was  easy  to  influence  her.  And  it  was  necessary 
for  those  who  wished  to  secure  power  to  do  so,  for  she 
retained  a  good  deal  of  the  importance  in  politics  which 
had  belonged  to  her  predecessors.  She  sat  in  the  council, 
and  the  ministers  were  her  nominees,  or  the  nominees  of 
those  who  worked  upon  her  feelings. 

The  constitution  was,  as  we  have  seen,  changing.     A 

time  was  coming  when  the  sovereign  would  be  obliged  to 

choose  ministers  trusted  by  the  Commons  and 

.Tier  consti-  * 

tutionai  im-  the  country.  The  existence  of  parties  had 
forced  William  to  do  so.  This  was  becoming 
even  more  necessary  in  Anne's  reign.  Indeed,  her  great- 
est change  of  ministers  in  1710  was  the  result  of  a  national 
and  party  agitation  which  carried  the  queen  along  with  it. 
This  presents  a  great  contrast  to  the  early  days  of  the 
period,  when  the  Stewart  kings  had  endeavoured  to  main- 
tain ministers  in  opposition  to  the  movement  of  the  time. 
The  extension  of  this  system  was  destined  in  the  end  to 
solve  the  problem  of  English  government.  But  mean- 
while the  fact  remains  that  Anne  was  sufficiently  her  own 
mistress  to  be  unwilling  to  make  changes  except  under 
pressure.  Thus  her  easily-led  nature  became  a  most  im- 
portant political  matter.  Her  personal  influence  was 
perhaps  heightened  by  the  fact  that  her  husband,  Prince 
George  of  Denmark,  was  a  man  of  no  political  weight. 
There  was  "nothing  in  him",  according  to  Charles  II., 
who  professed  to  have  "  tried  him  drunk  and  tried  him 
sober  ". 

The  reign  is  much  less  puzzling  than  that  which  pre- 
ceded it.  Three  main  problems,  the  European  question, 
chief  points  the  position  of  Parliament  in  the  state,  and 
of  the  reign,  fae  permanence  of  the  Revolution  settlement, 
seem  to  come  to  a  clear  issue — an  issue  whose  importance 
is  none  the  less  on  account  of  its  clearness. 

The  position  of  France  on  the  Continent  remained  to 
be  determined.  It  was  a  problem  which  had  occupied 
the  minds  of  statesmen  since  the  end  of'the  Thirty  Years' 


BEGINNINGS   OF   PARTY  GOVERNltfENT.  1 17 

War  in  1648.     Louis  XIV.  had  first  tried  to  seize  the 
Netherlands,  and  been  checked  by  the  Triple  Alliance  and 
the  Peace  of  Aix-la-Chapelle.     He  had  next    (l)  The 
tried    to   punish   the   Dutch,  but   had  been    European 
forced  to  desist  at  the  Peace  of  Nimuegen. 
His  ambition,  still  unsatisfied  by  his  gains,  had  then  been 
confronted  by  a  European  coalition,  which  finally  bound 
him  by  the  Peace  of  Ryswick.     Now  was  to  come  the 
war  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  which  was  to  break  his 
proud  spirit  and  rescue  the  Continent  from  the  spectre  of 
French  domination  which  had  haunted  the  imagination 
of  Europe  for  fifty  years. 

This  foreign  war  carried  the  second  problem  with  it. 
Whigs  and  Tories  could  not  fight  out  their  party  struggle 
upon  the  question  of  Jacobitism;  for  the  Pre-  (a)  The  party 
tender  never  wavered  in  his  allegiance  to  fttsrTrnp1ort-nd 
Rome,  and  most  Tory  statesmen  knew  that  a  ance. 
Roman  Catholic  king  was  out  of  the  question,  even  if  a 
son  of  James  II.  might  otherwise  have  been  desirable. 
But  the  Whig  war  and  the  Whigs  who  carried  it  on;  the 
Dissenters  who  were  still  the  friends  of  the  Whigs;  the 
"monied  men"  who  supplied  the  Whig  exchequer — these 
were  always  open  to  the  Tory  attack.  The  reign  of  Anne, 
thus  became  a  period  of  keen  party  struggle,  complicated 
at  every  step  by  the  military  question  on  the  Continent;  a 
struggle  carried  on  by  any  and  every  means,  at  the  termi- 
nation of  which  the  great  constitutional  change  had  been 
brought  far  on  its  way.  For,  with  a  weak  woman  on  the 
throne,  it  became  only  a  battle  of  "  ins  "  and  "  outs  ",  of 
those  who  held  power  and  those  who  wished  to  supplant 
them.  Those  who  won  must  do  so  by  having  Parliament 
on  their  side.  A  pale  reflection  of  such  a  struggle  is  wit- 
nessed now  in  our  everyday  political  life.  The  difference 
is  that,  now,  the  whole  nation,  with  its  millions  of  voters 
and  its  hourly  newspapers,  watches,  and  finally  decides  the 
struggle  at  the  polls;  whereas  in  those  days,  though  pam- 
phlets issued  rapidly  from  Whig  pens  and  Tory  pens,  it 
took  as  many  days  as  it  now  takes  hours  for  the  real  truth 
concerning  the  parliamentary  debates  to  penetrate  to  the 


Il8  THE    SUCCESSION   QUESTION. 

ears  even  of  the  cultivated  classes.  The  party  that  was 
out  of  power  had  to  raise  a  cry  sufficient  to  influence  those 
few  who  had  votes.  It  had  also  to  secure  the  queen's  ear 
by  means  of  those  who  were  about  her.  Yet,  after  the 
strides  made  in  the  direction  of  "  Cabinet "  government l 
between  the  Revolution  and  the  accession  of  George  I., 
the  bringing  of  the  will  of  the  nation  to  bear  on  these 
matters  was  only  a  question  of  time.  The  control  of 
government  had  passed  for  ever  from  the  hands  of  the 
personal  monarch.  It  was  bound  eventually  to  pass  to 
the  majority  of  the  nation. 

One  more  question,  which  had  agitated  England  for  a 
long  time,  was  also  co  come  up  for  solution.  The  Jacob- 
(3)  The  Sue-  ^tes  hoped  that,  though  Anne  might  be  per- 
cession  prob-  mitted  to  reign,  no  German  prince  would  ever 
lem>  succeed  to  the  throne  of  the  Stewart  House. 

The  Hanoverian  succession  was  the  law  of  the  land,  but 
whether  it  would  be  converted  into  a  fact  was  in  grave 
doubt  during  the  last  few  years  of  Anne's  life.  Between 
a  foreigner  and  a  Roman  Catholic  the  choice  was  not  an 
easy  one. 

With  these  three  points  before  us — the  European  crisis, 
Three  periods  the  party  struggle,  and  the  succession  dilemma 
of  the  reign.  — fae  reign  may  be  divided  into  three  periods. 

In  the  first  (1702-1708)  the  European  question  was 
foremost.  The  national  enthusiasm  set  the  war  going, 
and  the  genius  of  Marlborough  made  it  successful.  The 
queen  was  completely  under  the  influence  of  the  wife  of 
her  great  commander;  the  Whigs  secured  a  majority  in 
Parliament,  and  the  ministers  were  chosen  from  among 
them.  Louis  was  beaten  on  all  sides  and  sued  for  peace, 
which  was  at  first  refused.  In  the  second  period  (1708- 
1710)  the  strife  of  parties  at  home  is  all -important. 
Wearied  by  the  long  war,  the  nation  refused  to  support 
Marlborough,  as  they  had  refused  to  support  William. 
The  danger  seemed  over.  The  influence  of  the  duchess 
was  undermined,  and  Queen  Anne  ceased  to  take 

1This  means  that  the  ministers  are  chosen  entirely  from  the  leaders  of  the  party 
which  has  a  majority  in  Parliament,  and  resign  directly  they  lose  that  majority. 


COMMENCEMENT   OF   THE    EUROPEAN    WAR.  1 19 

pleasure  in  the  society  of  a  "  brawling  woman  in  a  wide 
house  ".  A  Tory  reaction  occurred.  Churchmen  raised 
their  voices  against  toleration,  and  the  foolish  pro- 
secution of  one  of  them  gave  away  the  dignity  of  the 
government,  who,  their  popularity  being  already  gone, 
could  not  long  hope  to  retain  office.  The  struggle 
ended  in  a  victory  for  the  Tories,  and  thus  incidentally 
for  the  principle  of  party  government.  A  Tory  ministry 
was  soon  appointed,  and  in  the  third  period  (1710-1714) 
the  Revolution  settlement  trembled  in  the  balance.  Peace 
was  made  with  France,  a  peace  perhaps  necessary,  perhaps 
just,  yet  in  terms  far  less  •  glorious  than  our  victorious 
armies  were  considered  to  have  earned.  The  Tory  minis- 
ters plotted  for  a  Tory  triumph,  perhaps  for  a  Stewart 
Restoration.  The  death  of  Anne,  however,  found  this 
ministry  divided  by  a  quarrel  between  its  leaders,  and 
the  Whigs  were  able  to  obtain  sufficient  influence  in  the 
council  to  secure  the  succession  of  George  I. 

The  war  of  the  Spanish  succession  (1702-1713)  was 
waged  mainly  in  three  separate  quarters.  First,  on  the 
eastern  side  of  France,  in_lhe_Netherlands,  xcharacterot 
along  the  Rhine  and  the  borders  of  Bavaria  the  war- 
and  Austria.  Here  Marlborough  and  his  Dutch  allies 
had  to  succour  the  Emperor,  and  to  drive  Louis  from  the 
Netherlands,  which  they  had  to  regain  foot  by  foot. 
Secondly,  in  Italy,  where  Eugene,  a  prince  of  the  house 
of  Savoy,  faced  the  French  armies  sent  into  the  Milanese 
Duchy,  and  endeavoured  to  prevent  them  from  reaching 
Austria  by  the  Tyrolese  passes.  Thirdly,  in  Spain  itself, 
where  the  English,  with  their  Spanish  and  Portuguese 
allies,  endeavoured  to  drive  Philip  V.  from  his  newly- 
acquired  throne,  and  to  place  the  Archduke  Charles — the 
candidate  of  the  Allies — in  his  place.  This  was  the 
ostensible  purpose  for  which  the  war  was  being  waged, 
though  it  turned  into  a  struggle  to  keep  France  from 
attacking  the  empire  and  the  Netherlands,  as  well  as  from 
obtaining  a  commanding  position  in  North  Italy;  the 
Spanish  campaigns  always  remained  of  secondary  import- 
ance. 


120  CAMPAIGN    OF    1703. 

As  William  had  died  when  war  was  popular  there  was  no 
delay  in  taking  up  the  struggle.  Marlborough  took  com- 
A  promising  mand  of  the  allies  in  the  Netherlands,  and 
opening.  war  was  formally  declared  in  May,  1702. 
Anne  was  still  as  much  as  ever  under  the  influence  of 
this  great  man  and  his  wife.  The  queen  allowed  her 
favourite  to  call  her  "  Mrs.  Morley  ",  and,  in  the  familiar 
intercourse  between  the  friends,  the  duchess  was  "  Mrs. 
Freeman ".  The  ministry  comprised  both  Whigs  and 
Tories ;  Marlborough  and  Godolphin,  to  whom  the  former 
was  related  by  marriage,  being  the  leading  spirits.  Soon, 
however,  it  became  clear  that*  the  Tories  loved  neither  the 
war  nor  those  who  were  conducting  it,  and  they  gradually 
were  eliminated  from  the  administration.  Nottingham 
left  office  in  1704,  and  the  Whigs  Sunderland1  and 
Somers  soon  appeared  in  the  ministry.  The  elections  in 
1705  were  in  favour  of  the  Whigs,  and  the  gradual  stiffen- 
ing of  the  Whig  element  in  the  government  reflected  their 
gains  in  Parliament.  Thus,  for  the  first  period  of  the 
reign,  the  war  policy  went  smoothly  enough  at  home. 
It  will  be  well,  therefore,  to  describe  the  main  features  of 
the  military  struggle. 

The  first  necessity  for  Marlborough  was  to  check  the 
French  advance  towards  the  Dutch  frontier,  for  Louis 
Mariborougn's  nad  already  possession  of  most  of  the  Span- 
objects.  ish  Netherlands.  In  1702  the  English 
general  was  occupied  with  the  siege  of  several  fortresses 
in  order  to  construct  the  desired  barrier.  Liege  was  cap- 
tured, and  in  1703  he  took  Bonn,  thus  stretching  his  line 
considerably  towards  the  Middle  Rhine.  Louis'  main 
object,  however,  was  not  to  expend  strength  on  this  fron- 
tier where  English  and  Dutch  stood  firm.  Between 
Eugene  in  Italy  and  Marlborough  in  Flanders  lay  a  great 
tract  of  country,  in  which  Louis'  allies,  the  Bavarians, 
were  for  the  moment  dominant.  It  was,  therefore,  the 
object  of  the  French  to  send  forces  through  this  great 
gap  and  attack  the  emperor  in  his  hereditary  dominion  of 
Austria.  He  was  the  weakest  member  of  the  coalition; 

1  Son  of  the  old  minister  of  James  II.,  but  a  strong  Whig  himself. 


THE    BATTLE   OF    BLENHEIM.  121 

and,  if  Louis  could  seize  Vienna  as  he  had  seized  Stras- 
bourg, he  could  dictate  terms  to  one  at  least  of  the  Allies. 
Prince  Eugene  won  the  battle  of  Cremona  in  1702,  and 
prevented  the  French,  who  held  Milan,  from  pouring 
troops  through  the  Tyrol  to  Austria.  But  the  French 
attack  was  soon  after  made  in  the  centre,  where  Marshal 
Tallard  made  a  dash  for  the  valley  of  the  Upper  Danube 
in  1704. 

The  King  of  France,  however,  had  to  deal  with  a  man 
whose  ordinary  calm  commonsense  flashed  into  genius 
when  a  campaign  or  a  battle  was  to  be  worked  Battle  of 
out  or  fought.  Marlborough  saw  through  the  Blenheim, 
plan  and  determined  to  defeat  it.  He  exe-  Aug' I3>  I7°4' 
cuted  a  rapid  movement  towards  the  Upper  Danube 
valley  and  joined  Prince  Eugene  near  Ulm.  Together 
they  advanced  to  attack  the  enemy,  and  at  Blenheim,  a 
little  village  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Danube,  a  crushing 
defeat  was  inflicted  upon  the  French  and  Bavarians. 
France  never  recovered  the  ,blow  during  the  war.  The 
whole  electorate  of  Bavaria  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Allies.  The  empire  was  saved. 

In  1705  the  chief  interest  ot  the  fighting  lies.in_Spain. 
The  Earl  of  Peterborough  captured  and  held  Barcelona, 
and  the  entire  district  of  Catalonia  declared  campaigns 
for  Charles.     Meanwhile  in  1704  the  English   in  Spain, 
fleet,  which  had  already  seized  a  great  squadron  of  Span- 
ish treasure-ships  in  Vigo  Bay,  took  Gibraltar,  under  the 
leadership  of  Sir  John  Rooke  and  Sir  Cloudesley  Shovel. 

In  1 706  the  Allies  triumphed  on  all  three  theatres  of  war. 
Marlborough  broke  into  the  French  lines  and  crushed 
their  armies  a  second  time  at  Ramillies  (May  A  year  of 
23),  securing  the  Netherlands,  and  occupying  success. 
Brussels,  Antwerp,  Ghent,  and  Bruges.  The  French  still 
held  the  barrier  fortresses,  chief  of  which  were  Mons, 
Tournai,  and  Lille;  but  they  were  obliged  to  keep  to 
their  own  frontier  instead  of  menacing  that  of  Holland. 
In  the  same  year  Eugene  succeeded  in  winning  a  vic- 
tory at  Turin,  and  thus  prevented  a  diversion  in  favour 
of  Louis  in  North  Italy.  The  Empire,  Holland,  and  Italy 


122  CAMPAIGNS   OF    1707-8. 

were  now  safe.  It  remained  to  see  if  the  allies  could  seat 
their  candidate  in  Spain.  Here,  too,  there  was  success  in 
that  year.  Barcelona  was  retained;  Madrid  was  entered; 
yet  the  obstinate  hostility  of  the  Castilians  was  destined 
before  long  to  render  the  position  of  the  Allies  in  Spain 
quite  untenable.  Portugal  was  on  their  side,  having  been 
secured  by  the  Methuen  Treaty  (1703),  by  which  England 
consented  to  receive  Portuguese  wines  at  a  less  duty  than 
French  ones.  This,  though  a  useful  alliance,  had  its 
disadvantage,  in  that  Englishmen  took  to  drinking  port 
instead  of  claret.  But,  in  spite  of  the  gain  of  Portugal 
on  one  side  of  Spain  and  of  Catalonia  on  the  other,  there 
still  remained  the  all-important  central  provinces,  whose 
animosity  to  the  Allies  and  their  candidate,  Charles,  could 
not  be  overcome.  In  1707  the  Duke  of  Berwick  beat  the 
Allies  in  the  battle  of  Almanza,  and  confined  them  strictly 
to  the  small  district  round  Barcelona,  which  had  been  true 
to  them  all  along.  There  was  little  hope  of  a  final  triumph 
in  Spain. 

But  Marlborough's  career  of  victory  went  on  unchecked. 
Baffled  in  their  attack  on  Italy  and  on  Austria,  the  French 
in  1708  made  a  vigorous  effort  to  recover  their  hold  on  the 
Netherlands.  But  Eugene  joined  Marlborough,  and  a 
third  signal  victory  was  placed  to  the  credit  of  the  Allies 
at  Oudenarde  (July  n,  1708).  The  capture  of  Lille,  the 
leading  frontier  fortress  of  France,  soon  followed. 

Meanwhile  in  Scotland  the  oft-raised  question  of  a 
Union  with  England  had  been  settled  at  last.  All 
The  union  through  the  century  since  James  I.'s  useless 
with  Scotland,  attempt  the  question  had  lain  open.  There 
were  two  great  difficulties.  The  Scots  abso- 
lutely refused  all  along  to  have  anything  to  do  with  an 
Episcopal  Church.  The  wretched  failure  of  the  Stewarts 
to  force  this  upon  them  had  been  recognized  by  William 
as  definite  and  never  to  be  renewed.  The  separation  of 
the  two  countries  in  church  matters  had  been  made  abso- 
lute. Clearly,  then,  any  political  union  must  be  one  of 
state  and  not  of  church.  Here  the  difficulty  lay  in  mat- 
ters commercial.  English  and  Scottish  merchants  were 


THE    UNION    WITH    SCOTLAND.  123 

not  on  good  terms.  The  Scots  had  to  suffer  the  burden 
of  the  navigation  laws  as  fully  as  if  they  had  been  Dutch- 
men. A  parliamentary  union  might  also  be  resisted  by 
patriotic  Scots,  who  liked  to  think  of  days  when  a  handful 
of  their  race  had  beaten  back  the  Plantagenet  attack. 
But  here  there  would  not  be  much  trouble.  If  religion 
were  divided  and  commerce  shared,  the  Union  was  likely 
to  be  easily  accomplished.  Under  the  rule  of  Cromwell 
Scotland  had  been  united  to  England,  and  then  all  com- 
mercial restrictions  had  been  removed.  This  free  ex- 
change ceased  when,  at  the  Restoration,  the  Scots  Par- 
liament regained  its  independence.  They  had,  therefore, 
now  to  choose  between  independence  and  free  trade.  A 
scheme  proposed  by  one  Paterson,  in  the  reign  of  William 
III.,  by  which  Scots  were  to  secure  a  foremost  place  in 
the  commercial  world  by  colonizing  the  isthmus  of  Darien 
and  making  it  a  depot  for  trade  of  east  and  west,  had 
failed  miserably.  The  Spaniards,  whose  rights  they  in- 
vaded, and  the  climate,  which  they  thought  much  better 
than  it  proved  to  be,  combined  to  kill  off  the  colonists. 
This,  together  with  the  jealousy  shown  towards  the  enter- 
prise in  England,  was  enough  to  make  a  wider  breach 
more  probable  than  a  closer  union  between  the  two 
nations. 

But  the  Scots  took  advantage  of  the  coming  succession 
problem  to  make  Englishmen  think  less  of  Scottish  com- 
mercial rivalry  and  more  of  Scottish  political  The  Act  of 
union.  Their  parliament  in  Edinburgh  de-  Security, 
clared  in  1703  that,  though  they  would  have  as  sove- 
reign after  Queen  Anne  a  descendant  of  the  Electress 
Sophia,  yet  their  nominee  should  not  be  the  same  as 
England's  unless  their  religion  and  trade  were  secured. 
This  "Act  of  Security"  was  indeed  a  skilful  trick  to 
bring  the  English  to  terms.  Commissioners  were  named 
to  discuss  a  union  of  the  two  realms,  as  soon  as  the 
northern  kingdom  threatened  to  sever  the  union  of  the 
two  crowns,  which  had  been  a  fact  since  1603.  The 
terms  finally  adopted  were  those  we  have  suggested. 
Their  religion  was  secured,  their  commerce  made  free: 


124  MALPLAQUET. 

their  legal  system  remained  to  bear  witness,  if  necessary, 
to  their  ancient  independence :  Scottish  members,  to  the 
number  of  45,  were  to  sit  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
while  1 6  peers  were  to  be  elected  by  the  whole  body  of 
nobles  to  represent  them  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Thus 
ended  one  of  the  greatest  difficulties  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  We  have  seen  how  it  baffled  the  wit  of  James  I., 
brought  Charles  and  Laud  to  war,  and  their  system  to 
overthrow.  It  had  given  occasion  for  the  display  of  the 
cynical  indifference  of  Charles  II.,  and  the  bigoted  bru- 
tality of  his  brother.  Now  prosperity  and  peace  were  to 
reward  the  Scots  for  a  century  of  bloodshed  and  persecu- 
tion. 

Taking   advantage   ot    some    considerable   discontent 

when  the  independence  of  the  kingdom  was  lost,   the 

French  and  the  Pretender  tried  in   1708  to 

Malnlaquet.  ,.  .  ,  T         ...         •    • 

create  a  diversion,  by  a  Jacobite  rising  in 
Scotland.  But  the  Pretender  was  delayed  by  the  measles, 
and  the  French  fleet  was  dispersed  by  the  vigorous 
measures  of  Admiral  Byng.  Far  from  being  recalled 
to  defend  England  Marlborough  was  winning  his  fourth 
wonderful  victory  in  September,  1709,  by  crushing  Mar- 
shal Villars  at  Malplaquet.  Mons  fell,  and  the  power  of 
France  was  broken. 

But  this  series  of  victories  was  over.  In  the  second 
period  of  the  reign  the  government  was  to  be  defeated  at 
A  Tory  home  though  victorious  abroad.  For  some 
reaction.  tjme  thg  Tory  party,  though  weak,  had  been 
working  to  recover  influence.  They  were  led  by  Robert 
Harley,  an  ambitious  and  unscrupulous  statesman,  who, 
with  Henry  St.  John,  better  known  afterwards  as  Lord 
Bolingbroke,  represented  a  Tory  opposition  to  Marl- 
borough  and  the  war.  The  national  feeling  was  now  too 
important  to  be  neglected,  and  every  shift  in  it  was 
eagerly  watched  by  the  Tories.  They  were  not  slow  to 
note  that  the  war,  in  spite  of  all  its  brilliant  moments, 
was  steadily  waning  in  popularity;  the  taxation  necessary 
to  support  it  was  heavy,  and  it  was  loudly  asserted  that 
Marlborough  and  the  Whigs  continued  the  war  because  it 


A  TORY   REACTION.  125 

kept  them  in  power.  There  were  some  grounds  for  such 
an  assertion.  More  than  once  Louis  had  proposed  to 
negotiate  for  a  peace.  He  had  even  offered  to  give  up 
assisting  his  grandson  in  Spain,  to  give  the  Dutch  a 
number  of  barrier  fortresses,  and  to  banish  the  Pretender. 
But  the  Allies  were  not  content:  they  insisted  that  the 
French  king  should  help  them  to  drive  his  grandson  from 
Spain.  They  asked  a  half-conquered  foe  to  join  the  Allies 
who  had  beaten  him.  This  was  too  much ;  and  France 
was  stirred  to  enthusiasm  by  the  imposition  of  terms  which 
amounted  to  a  national  insult.  This  failure  to  make  peace 
when  it  was  offered  on  fair  conditions  exasperated  many 
and  caused  a  Tory  reaction. 

But  another  event  in  1 609  had  even  more  effect.  A  high- 
church  clergyman,  named  Dr.  Sacheverell,  attacked  the 
Whigs  and  Dissenters  from  the  pulpit,  and  Dr.  Sacheve- 
went  the  length  of  publishing  his  sermons.  rel1- 
He  spoke  of  the  perils  of  the  faithful  among  "false 
brethren ",  and  described  these  latter  in  terms  so  clear 
that  no  one  could  mistake  them.  The  government 
actually  impeached  this  preacher,  which  was  very  foolish, 
for  it  gave  him  popularity  among  a  far  larger  number  of 
people  than  those  who  read  the  sermons  in  question. 
The  man  who  had  attacked  and  been  attacked  by 
the  unpopular  Whig  government  became  a  hero  among 
Tories  and  churchmen,  and  the  Tories  gained  from  the 
enthusiasm  which  Sacheverell  roused  against  the  Whigs. 

Meanwhile  Harley  was  securing  an  ally  at  court  whose 
services  were  more  important  still.  Mrs.  Masham,  his 
cousin,  was  quietly  gaining  an  influence  over  , 

.  .',     rl  '  V  t     Mrs.  Masham. 

the  mind  of  Anne  which  was  soon  to  supplant 

that  of  the  duchess.    The  queen  was  tired  of  this  tyrannous 

woman,  and  welcomed  the  more  gentle  sway  of  the  new 

favourite. 

Thus,  with  a  Tory  influence  supreme  at  court  and  a 
Tory  enthusiasm  spreading  in  the  street,  the  ,,  „  ,.. 

.....  .  r  3  .  r  all  ot  the 

crisis  ot  the  war  in   1710,  when    Louis    pro-  war  ministry, 

posals  were  again  refused  at  Gertruydenberg,  I7I°' 

led  to  a  clean  sweep  of  the  Whig  ministry.     The  queen 


126  FALL  OF  THE   WHIGS. 

had  already  refused  to  appoint  Marlborough  captain- 
general  for  life.  The  Tories  came  into  power,  and  in  the 
following  year  the  great  duke  and  his  wife  were  dismissed 
from  their  offices.  No  pains  were  spared  by  the  Tories 
to  secure  this  triumph.  They  accused  Marlborough  of 
peculation  under  circumstances  which  do  them  little  credit. 
They  also  secured  the  services  of  pamphleteers,  foremost 
among  whom  was  Dean  Swift,  the  greatest  prose  writer  of 
the  age.  In  the  Conduct  of  the  Allies  he  attacked  the  war 
policy,  and  endeavoured  to  undermine  the  support  which 
the  Whigs  possessed  in  the  commercial  interests  of  the 
nation :  England,  he  urged,  was  getting  terribly  into  debt 
in  order  to  preserve  Dutch  towns,  whose  citizens  would 
repay  her  by  underselling  English  merchants.  We  were 
fighting  for  our  rivals,  not  for  ourselves.  Our  interest  in 
the  war  was  slight,  yet  we  had  become  a  chivalrous  power 
willing  to  fight  other  people's  battles  all  over  Europe. 
Language  like  this  had  a  great  effect. 

The  Tory  ministry  marked  its  accession  to  power  by 
an  attack  upon  the  Dissenters.  They  passed  the  famous 
bill  against  Occasional  Conformity.  It  forbade  men  to 
receive  the  Sacrament,  merely  to  qualify  for  office,  and  then 
go  back  to  their  Dissenting  meeting-houses.  The  Tories 
hoped  thus  to  exclude  the  Dissenting  element  from  the 
town  corporations,  and  through  them  from  Parliament. 

But  the  greatest  achievement  of  the  new  ministers  was 
the  ending  of  the  war  by  the  Peace  of  Utrecht.  They 
Treaty  of  had  come  to  power  as  a  peace  ministry,  pro- 
utrecht,  1713.  testing  against  the  war  and  the  war-makers. 
They  now  put  an  end  to  the  struggle.  The  claimant  for 
whom  the  Allies  were  fighting,  the  Archduke  Charles, 
had  become  emperor  about  the  time  of  the  accession  of 
the  Tories  to  office.  Their  task  was  therefore  easy.  It 
was  absurd  to  suppose  that  Spain  was  to  be  wrested  from 
Louis  and  handed  to  the  Emperor.  Charles  had  been 
chosen  as  king  when  it  was  improbable  that  he  would 
ever  become  emperor.  It  therefore  remained  to  find 
another  candidate  and  begin  the  war  afresh,  or  to  make 
peace.  To  leave  Philip  V.  on  the  throh-e,  of  Spain  was 


HARLEY   AND   ST.   JOHN.  127 

certainly  to  give  up  an  essential  point.  But  as  there  was 
no  one  else,  and  as  the  Spaniards  were  not  likely  to  accept 
any  one  else,  it  was  a  not  altogether  bad  solution. 

Louis  therefore  had  the  satisfaction  of  securing  Spain 
for  his  grandson,  and  added  a  solemn  engagement  that 
the  crowns  of  France  and  Spain  should  never  be  united, 
for  the  benefit  of  anyone  who  might  still  believe  in  solemn 
engagements.  He  acknowledged  the  Hanoverian  succes- 
sion, banished  the  Pretender,  and  restored  to  the  Dutch 
their  barrier  fortresses.  English  merchants  obtained  some 
limited  trading  rights  in  the  Spanish  Indies.  Finally, 
while  England  kept  Gibraltar  and  Minorca,  her  colonial 
gains  in  the  eighteenth  century  were  foreshadowed  by  the 
acquisition  of  Newfoundland  and  other  portions  of  French 
North  America.  The  Netherlands  and  the  Italian  pro- 
vinces of  Milan,  Sardinia,  and  Naples  went  to  the  emperor, 
the  Duke  of  Savoy  obtained  Sicily,  while  Louis  retained 
Strasbourg. 

Thus,  by  1713,  the  European  question  was  settled  and 
the  triumph  of  party  government  had  begun  in  England. 
It  is  noticeable  that  Tory  peers  were  created  specially  to 
make  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  order  to  pre- 
vent opposition  to  the  Peace. 

In  the  third  period  of  the  reign  the  Succession  question 
loomed  large.  Anne  was  in  bad  health.  The  Electress 
Sophia  was  over  80  years  of  age,  and  thus  Dangertothe 
there  was  a  near  prospect  of  two  rapid  Protestant 
changes  in  the  occupancy  of  the  throne,  if  the  s< 
latter  should  outlive  the  queen.  Fortunately  she  died  a 
few  weeks  earlier.  Her  son  George,  Elector  of  Hanover, 
was  about  fifty  years  of  age  and  a  good  soldier,  but  beyond 
this  little  was  known  about  him.  The  party  spirit  was 
so  completely  dominant  in  England  that  the  Tory  leaders 
may  well  have  doubted  whether  such  a  king  would  be 
accepted  by  the  nation.  Harley,  now  Earl  of  Oxford, 
and  his  colleague  Bolingbroke,  are  generally  supposed  to 
have  intended  to  restore  the  Pretender,  since  they  wrote 
letters  to  him.  Perhaps  they  were  only  trimming,  as 
better  men  had  done  before.  But  it  seems  that  Boling- 


128  DEATH   OF  QUEEN   ANNE. 

broke  at  least  had  gone  very  far  in  the  direction  of  con- 
spiring for  the  restoration  of  James  III.  by  force  of  arms. 
It  is  clear  they  had  little  to  hope  from  the  legal  heir  to 
the  throne,  who  was  sure  to  place  power  in  the  hands 
of  the  Whigs.  Fortunately  for  England  these  two  states- 
men quarrelled  just  before  Anne  died.  Oxford  was  dis- 
missed. The  question  arose  who  should  succeed  him  as 
Lord  Treasurer.  Some  of  the  Whig  lords  promptly 
seized  this  opportunity  of  the  Queen's  illness,  forced  their 
way  into  the  Privy  Council,  and  secured  the  appointment 
of  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  a  firm  supporter  of  the  Hano- 
verian succession.  This  decided  the  matter.  Queen 
Anne  died  on  August  i,  1714,  and  the  Elector  George 
Lewis  was  proclaimed  King  of  Great  Britain,  France,  and 
Ireland,  Defender  of  the  Faith. 

The  days  of  the  Stewarts  were  over.  Personal  govern- 
ment by  the  monarch  was  now  to  become  obsolete,  under 
two  foreign  kings  who  knew  nothing  and  cared  nothing 
for  English  politics.  For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of 
the  realm  the  sovereign  was  to  become  a  secondary 
person  in  the  governance  of  the  land  where  he  reigned 
but  did  not  rule.  His  place  was  to  be  taken  by  the 
prime-minister, .  the  chief  of  one  of  the  party  cabinets 
which  were  for  the  future  to  be  the  rule  and  not  the 
exception.  The  next  period  of  English  history  should  be 
called  the  reign  of  Walpole,  and  not  labelled  with  the 
comparatively  insignificant  names  of  the  first  two  Georges. 
The  ancient  struggle  between  king  and  parliament  had 
reached  its  end. 


INDEX. 


Abhorrers,  the,  84. 

Addresses,  Vote  of  No,  57. 

Adwalton  Moor,  battle  of,  44. 

Agitators,  the,  56,  57,  60. 

"Agreement  of  the  People",  61. 

Alfprd,  battle  of,  53. 

Alliance,  Triple,  76,  77. 

Almanza,  battle  of,  122. 

Alsace,  coveted  by  Louis  XIV.,  75; 
occupied  by  him,  85. 

America,  Puritan  colonists  of,  74. 

Anne,  Queen,  82;  excluded  from  the 
throne  by  Exclusion  Bill,  84;  recon- 
ciled to  William  III.,  109;  ruled  by 
Countess  of  Marlborough,  109;  acces- 
sion of,  115,  120;  character  of,  116; 
dismisses  the  Churchills,  126;  death, 
127. 

Argyle,  Archibald  Campbell,  Marquis 
of,  leader  of  Covenanters,  36,  58 ; 
executed,  76. 

Argyle,  Archibald,  Earl  of,  son  of  above, 
rebels  against  James  II.,  90. 

Arlington,  Lord,  member  of  the  "Ca- 
bal ",  76 ;  concerned  in  Treaty  of 
Dover,  77. 

Arminianism,  23,  and  note. 

Army,  Standing,  disliked,  76,  78,  80 ; 
disbandment  of,  demanded,  82  ;  in- 
creased by  James  II.,  91;  established 
at  Hounslow,  90. 

Army,  the  New  Model.     See  Model. 

Array,  Commissions  of,  issued  by 
Charles  I.,  39. 

Ashley,  Anthony.     See  Skaftesbury. 

Assembly,  Glasgow,  29 ;  Westminster, 
48. 

Assize,  the  Bloody,  91. 

Association,  the  Eastern,  49. 

Attainder,  Bill  of,  against  Strafford,  33. 

Auldearn,  battle  of,  53. 

Bacon,  Sir  Francis,  10 ;  his  theory  of 

the  judge's  position,  12;  disgrace  of, 

18. 

Baillie,  Robt.,  Scottish  historian,  29,  50. 
Bank  of  England  founded,  107. 
Barebones'  Parliament,  64. 
Bate,  Case  of  Impositions,  10,  13. 
Bavaria,    Joseph,    prince    of,    allotted 

Spain   by  the   partition  treaty,   112; 

dies,  113. 
Bavaria,  Elector  of,  joins  the  French, 

120;  beaten  at  Blenheim,  121. 


Baxter,  Richard,  Presbyterian  divine, 
94- 

Benevolence,  a  form  of  taxation,  13,  22. 

Berwick,  Duke  of,  wins  battle  of  Al- 
manza, 122. 

Berwick,  Pacification  of,  30. 

Bills,  the  Four,  57. 

Bishops  ejected  from  House  of  Lords, 
38 ;  restored,  72 ;  Petition  of  the 
'  Seven,  95  ;  their  trial,  95. 

Blake,  Admiral,  63. 

Blenheim,  battle  of,  121. 

Bohemia  rebels,  16;  elects  Frederick 
of  the  Palatinate  as  king,  16. 

Bolingbroke,  Henry  St.  John,  Viscount, 
leader  of  the  Tories,  124 ;  intrigues 
with  the  Pretender,  127. 

Bothwell  Brig,  battle  of,  83. 

Boyne,  battle  of  the,  103. 

Bradock  Down,  battle  of,  44. 

Breda,  Declaration  of,  69;  Peace  of,  75. 

Brentford,  sack  of,  43. 

Bridgewater  stormed,  53. 

Bristol,  secured  by  Waller,  45;  surren- 
dered, 45 ;  besieged  by  Fairfax  and 
stormed,  54. 

Buckingham,  George  Villiers,  Duke  of, 
14,  17;  influence  over  Charles  I.,  18; 
visit  to  Spain,  18;  attacked  in  Parlia- 
ment, 22 ;  assassinated,  23. 

Buckingham,  George,  Duke  of,  son  of 
above,  member  of  the  "Cabal",  76. 

Burgundy,  County  of,  secured  by  Louis 
XIV.,  75.  77,  81. 

Byng,  Admiral,  disperses  French  fleet, 
124. 

Cabal,  meaning  of,  76,  note  ;  the  ad- 
ministration of  the,  76,  77;  fall  of,  78. 

Cabinet,  the,  6. 

Cadiz,  Expedition  to,  22. 

Cambridge,  Vice-chancellor  of,  sus- 
pended by  James  II.,  95. 

Canons  of  1604,  9. 

Carr,  Robert.  See  Rochester  and 
Somerset. 

Catesby  the  conspirator,  9. 

Catharine  of  Braganza,  wife  of  Charles 
II...  74- 

Cavalier  Parliament.   See  Parliament. 

Cecil,  Robert,  Earl  of  Salisbury,  mini- 
ster of  James  I.,  8  ;  his  policy  and 
death,  n. 

"Cessation",  Irish,  the,  48. 


1 3o 


INDEX. 


Chalgrove,  battle  of,  43. 

Charles  I.,  King  of  England,  4;  pro- 
posed marriage  with  Spanish  Prin- 
cess, 13;  visit  of,  to  Spain,  18;  acces- 
sion of,  20 ;  marriage,  20  ;  character, 
20  ;  absolute  rule  of,  24  ;  visits  Scot- 
land, 28;  consents  to  Strafford's  death, 
33 ;  visits  Scotland,  34 ;  reaction  in 
favour  of,  35 ;  church  policy,  36 ; 
his  conservative  attitude,  37,  38,  39 ; 
blunders  in  exciting  suspicion,  38 ; 
his  attempt  on  the  Five  members,  38; 
leaves  London,  38;  his  military  pros- 
pects, 41;  failure  of  his  cause,  52;  his 
intrigues,  53;  is  pursued,  54;  flies  to 
Scottish  camp,  54 ;  seized  by  Cornet 
Joyce,  56  ;  escapes  to  Isle  of  Wight, 
$7  ;  trial  and  death  of,  59. 

Charles  II.,  King  of  England:  pfo- 
claimed  in  Edinburgh,  62 ;  takes 
Covenant,  62;  defeated  at  Worcester 
and  escapes  to  France,  62 ;  expelled 
from  France,  66 ;  issues  Declaration 
of  Breda,  69;  restoration  of,  69;  cha- 
racter of,  70;  his  relations  with  Louis 
XIV.,  71  ;  his  religious  changes,  72; 
marriage,  73  ;  his  quarrel  with  Hol- 
land, 74  ;  makes  the  secret  Treaty  of 
Dover,  77;  issues  Declaration  of  In- 
dulgence, 77 ;  opposition  of  Parlia- 
ment to,  78,  80;  applies  to  Louis  XIV. 
for  money,  81 ;  defends  his  brother's 
succession,  82,  83,  85;  secures  a  strong 
party,  85,  86;  death,  87. 

Charles  II.,  King  of  Spain,  designs  of 
Louis  XIV.  on  his  kingdom,  75;  dies, 
112. 

Charles,  Archduke  of  Austria,  candidate 
for  the  Spanish  throne,  112;  becomes 
Emperor,  126. 

Cheriton,  battle  of,  49. 

Chester,  surrender  of,  54. 

Christ  Church,  Oxford,  parliament  in, 
85 ;  Roman  Catholic  appointed  as 
Dean  of,  95. 

Churchill,  John.     See  Marlborough. 

Clarendon,  Edward  Hyde,  Earl  of, 
leader  of  church  party  in  Long  Par- 
liament, 35;  minister  of  Charles  II. 
73;  fall  of  his  administration,  76;  im- 
peached and  banished,  76. 

Clarendon,  second  Earl  of,  son  of  above, 
Lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland:  dismissed 
by  James  II.,  93. 

Claverhouse,  James  Graham  of.  Vis- 
count Dundee,  heads  Jacobite  rising 
in  Scotland,  killed  at  Killiecrankie, 
104. 

Clifford,  Sir  Thomas,  member  of 
"  Cabal  ",  76,  77. 

Code,  the  "  Clarendon  ",  73,  93. 

Coke,  Chief  Justice,  quarrel  of,  with 
James  I.,  10,  12,  13. 


Colchester,  Royalist  rising  at,  58. 

Commission,  Court  of  High,  26:  abol- 
ished 34;  revived,  92. 

Commonwealth,  the,  60. 

Comprehension,  meaning  of,  72. 

Compton,  bishop  of  London :  opposed 
to  James  II.,  91,  92;  suspended,  93; 
invites  William  to  England,  96. 

Conference,  Hampton  Court,  9,  26. 

Conference,  Savoy,  73. 

Contract,  the  Great,  10. 

Conventicle  Act,  the,  75. 

Convention,  the,  of  1660,  69;  character 
of  its  work,  71,  72;  dissolution  of,  72. 

Convention  of  1688,  97,  98,  102. 

Corporation  Act,  73. 

Council,  Privy,  Temple's  scheme  for 
organizing,  82,  83. 

Council  of  State  during  the  Common- 
wealth, 61,  63. 

Covenant,  the  Scottish,  29;  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant,  48. 

Covenanters,  persecution  of,  76;  defeat 
of,  83;  proclaim  William  and  Mary, 
104. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  character  of,  44 ; 
policy  for  organizing  the  Army,  46, 
48;  his  raid  round  Oxford,  52;  his 
campaign  in  the  West,  54;  attempts 
to  come  to  terms  with  Charles,  56,  57; 
unpopular,  57;  his  part  in  Second  Civil 
war,  58;  his  aims,  60;  his  campaign 
in  Ireland,  61;  in  Scotland,  61;  dis- 
solves the  "Rump",  63;  becomes 
Protector,  64;  opposed  in  Parliament, 
65;  his  foreign  policy,  66;  refuses  the 
title  of  king,  66;  dies,  67. 

Cromwell,  Richard,  son  of  above,  be- 
comes Protector,  67;  his  character  and 
abdication,  67. 

Culpeper,  Sir  John,  35,  48 

Danby,  Sir  Thomas  Osborne,  Earl  of, 
minister  of  Charles  II.,  79,  81;  im- 
peached, 81,  82;  minister  of  William 
III.,  103;  his  fall,  108. 

Darien  Scheme,  the,  123. 

Declaration  of  Indulgence.  See  Indul- 
gence. 

Devonshire,  Earl  of,  opposes  James  II., 
91,  96. 

Digby,  Sir  Everard,  conspirator,  9. 

Digby,  John,  Earl  of  Bristol,  ambas- 
sador in  Spain  under  James  I.,  13, 
18. 

Dispensing  Power,  74,  note;  use  of,  80, 
92;  recognized  by  law,  92;  James's 
abuse  of,  92. 

Dissenter,  Letter  to  a,  94,  note. 

Dissenters,  persecution  of,  73;  James  II. 
and  the,  93,  94. 

Divine  right,  4,  10,  70,  84,  87,  88. 

Dover,  Secret  Treaty  of,  77. 


INDEX. 


Drogheda,  massacre  at,  61. 

Dunbar,  battle  of.  62. 

Dundee.     See  Cla-verhouse. 

Dunkirk,  taken  for  England,  66;  Sold 

to  France,  74,  76. 
Dutch,  England's  rivalry  with,  14,  74; 

Cromwell's  war  with,  62,  64;  designs 

of  Louts   XIV.  against,  75,   76,  77; 

Charles  II. 's  wars  with,  74,  75,  76, 

77;  peace  with,  79. 

Edgehill,  battle  of,  42. 

Edinburgh,  riot  in,  28. 

Eliot,  Sir  John,  leads  opposition  in  Par- 
liament, 22;  imprisonment  and  death 
of,  24. 

Elizabeth,  Queen,  her  church  policy,  3. 

Elizabeth,  daughter  of  James  L,  her 
marriage,  n. 

England,  New,  26,  74. 

Episcopacy,  attacked  in  Long  Parlia- 
ment, 35. 

I/  Eugene  of  Savoy,  leader  of  Austrian 
army,  119;  wins  battle  of  Cremona, 
121 ;  joins  Marlborough  before  Blen- 
heim, 121 ;  wins  battle  at  Turin,  121; 
joins  Marlborough  before  battle  of 
Oudenarde,  122. 

Exclusion  Bill,  83,  84,  85. 

Fairfax,  Thomas,  Lord,  44,  50;  com- 
mands the  New  Model  army,  5 1 ;  cam- 
paigns of,  53,  54;  marches  on  London, 
56;  his  work  in  Second  Civil  war,  58. 

Falkland,  Lord,  death  of,  46. 

Fawkes,  Guy,  9. 

Felton  assassinates  Buckingham,  23. 

Ferdinand  II.,  Emperor,  16. 

Fire  of  London,  75. 

Five  Mile  Act,  75. 

Fleclwood  demands  independence  of 
the  army,  67. 

Tloyd,  cruel  punishment  of,  17. 

Frarce,  Buckingham  allied  with,  19; 
war  with,  22 ;  peace  with,  24 ;  alliance 
of  Cromwell  with,  66. 

Frederick,  Elector  Palatine,  marries 
daughter  of  James  II.,  n;  elected 
King  of  Bohemia,  16;  character  of, 
16. 

^/Gainsborough,  battle  of,  44. 

George  of  Denmark,  husband  of  Queen 

Anoe,  1 1 6. 
George,  Elector  of  Hanover,  becomes 

King  of  England,  127. 
Gibraltar  taken  by  the  English,  121. 
Glasgow,  Assembly  at,  29 
Glencoe,  massacre  of,  104. 
Gloucester,  siege  of,  45,  46. 
Godolphin,   minister  of  William   III., 

103;  of  Anne,  120. 
Gondomar,  Spanish  ambassador,  12, 16. 


Goring,  Lord,  surrenders  Portsmouth, 

42;  misconduct  of,  53. 
Graces,  the,  25. 
Grenville,  Sir  Bevil,  44. 
Gustavus  Adolphus,  King  of  Sweden,  25. 

Habeas  Corpus  Act,  83. 

Hales,  Sir  Edward,  case  of,  dispensing 

power,  92. 
Halifax,  George  Savile,  Lord,  opposes 

Exclusion  Bill,  83,  84;  dismissed  by 

James  I.,  91;  his  writings,  94,  95. 
Hamilton,  Marquis  of,  36;  leads  Scots 

in  Second   Civil  war,  58;  executed, 

62. 
Hampden,   John,   resists   Ship-money, 

27;  impeached,  38;  killed,  43. 
Harley,  Robert,  Earl  of  Oxford,  leader 

of  the  Tories,  124;  intrigues  with  the 

Pretender,  127. 

Haslerigg,  one  of  the  Five  members,  38. 
Heidelberg,  fall  of,  17. 
Henrietta  Maria  married  to  Charles  I., 

20;  lands  in  England  with  money,  43 
Henry  IV.  of  France,  death  of,  n. 
Henry,  Prince  of  Wales,  death  of,  12. 
Hereford  surprised  by  Waller,  45;  re- 
lief of,  54. 

Hertford,  Marquis  of,  42,  44. 
Hogue,  La,  battle  of,  106. 
Holies,  one  of  the  Five  members,  38. 
Hopton,  Sir  Ralph,  victories  of,  42-46; 

defeat  of,  49,  54. 

Hull,  Charles  refused  admission  to,  39. 
Hyde,  Anne,  wife  of  James  II.,  82. 
Hyde,  Edward.     See  Clarendon. 
Hyde,  Lawrence,  son  of  above.      See 

Rochester. 

Impositions,  question  of,  10,  13. 

Incident,  the,  36. 

Indemnity,  Bill  of,  72,  102,  103. 

Independents,  48;  contrasted  with  Pree- 
byterians,  52;  success  of,  52,  54;  ex- 
treme party  of,  64. 

Indulgence,  Declaration  of,  1672,  77; 
withdrawn,  78. 

Indulgence,  Declaration  of,  1687,  93; 
compared  with  that  of  1672,  94;  or- 
dered to  be  read  in  church,  95. 

Instrument  of  Government,  the,  64. 

Ireland,  difficulties  under  James  I.,  u; 
Chichester's  government  of,  n  ;  Straf- 
ford's  government  of,  25;  rebellion  of 
1641,  36,  61;  rising  against  the  Com- 
monwealth, 61;  Jacobite  rebellion  in, 
103. 

Ireton,  Henry,  61. 

Jacobites, their  intrigues  against  William 
III.,  101;  rising  in  Ireland,  103;  in 
Scotland,  104  ;  assassination  plot 
against  William  III.,  109. 


132 


INDEX. 


Jamaica,  capture  of,  66. 

James  I.,  4;  character,  7;  his  problem, 
7;  his  first  parliament,  8,  10;  religious 
policy,  9 ;  quarrels  with  parliament, 
8,  ID,  1 7 ;  quarrels  with  Coke,  10 ; 
foreign  policy,  n,  12,  16,  19;  his 
Spanish  leanings,  14,  15,  17;  death 
of,  19. 

James  II.,  scheme  to  exclude  him  from 
the  throne,  82,  83,  84;  his  Roman 
Catholicism,  82,  89 ;  marries  Anne 
Hyde,  82;  marries  Mary  of  Modena, 
82;  his  accession,  87;  character  and 
aims,  88,  89;  his  breach  of  Test  Act, 
91 ;  opposition  to  him,  91 ;  his  measures 
to  secure  power,  92,  93;  his  attack  on 
the  universities,  95;  birth  of  his  son, 
95;  his  escape,  97;  his  court  at  St. 
Germains,  101 :  heads  rising  in  Ire- 
land, 103;  defeated  and  returns  to 
France,  103;  death,  114. 

James,  son  of  James  II.  See  Preten- 
der. 

Jeffreys,  Chief  Justice,  his  Bloody 
Assize,  90,  91. 

Jesuits,  their  influence  at  court  of  James 
II-,  91,  93- 

Jews  allowed  to  return  to  England,  65. 

Joyce,  Cornet,  seizes  Charles  I.,  56. 

Judges  appealed  to  by  Stewarts,  10. 

Killiecrankie,  battle  of,  104. 

Kilsyth,  battle  of,  52. 

Kirke,  Colonel,  his  cruelty,  90. 

Lambert,  John,  General,  leader  of  the 
Army,  64;  demands  independence  for 
it,  67;  deprived  of  his  commission,  68; 
tried  for  treason,  73. 

Langport,  battle  of,  53. 

Lansdown,  battle  of,  45. 

Laud,  William,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 21-25;  character  of,  21;  his  Ar- 
minian  tendencies,  23;  provokes  resis- 
tance, 26 ;  impeached,  32 ;  executed, 
5'- 

Lauderdale,  member  of  the  "Cabal", 
76;  governing  in  Scotland,  76. 

Leicester  sacked,  52. 

Leslie,  Alexander,  29. 

Leslie,  David,  53;  defeats  Montrose,54. 

Levellers,  the,  57,  61,  68. 

Limerick,  siege  of,  103. 

Lindsey,  Earl  of,  slain  at  Edgehill,  43. 

London,  petitions  against  Episcopacy, 
35;  anxious  for  peace,  45;  fire  of,  75; 
stronghold  of  the  Whigs,  86;  charter 
of,  confiscated,  86;  riots  in,  93. 

Londonderry,  siege  of,  103. 

Lords,  House  of,  abolished  during  Com- 
monwealth, 61;  restored  at  Restora- 
tion, 72;  rejects  Exclusion  Bill,  85. 

Lostwithiel,  surrender  of  Essex  at,  49. 


Louis  XIII.,  20;  secures  English  help 
against  Huguenots,  22. 

Louis  XIV  ,  his  relations  with  Charles 
II.,  71,  74;  his  European  schemes, 
75;  war  against  England,  75;  claims 
Spanish  Netherlands,  76  ;  Triple 
Alliance  against,  76,  77 ;  makes  Treaty 
of  Dover,  77;  English  opposed  to, 
78,  79 ;  bribes  English  members  of 
parliament,  80;  his  policy  in  England, 
84,85;  paramount  fii  Europe, 88;  helps 
James  II.,  90;  rescinds  Edict  of 
Nantes,  92;  fails  to  prevent  the  in- 
vasion of  William  III.,  96:  receives 
James  II.,  101:  his  war  with  William 
III.,  106;  aids  the  Jacobites,  109; 
acknowledges  William  III.  by  Treaty 
of  Ryswick,  no;  his  partition  treaties, 
IT 2,  113;  recognizes  the  Pretender  as 
king  of  England,  115;  war  of  Spanish 
Succession,  119-126;  makes  Treaty  of 
Utrecht,  126. 

Lunsford,  Colonel,  37. 

Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  attacked  by 
James  II.,  95. 

Maidstone,  Royalist  rising  at,  58. 

Malplaquet,  battle  of,  124. 

Manchester,  Lord,  46,  50,  51. 

Manifesto,  the  Army,  56. 

Mansfield,  Count,  17;  his  expedition,  19. 

Maria,  Infanta  of  Spain,  proposed  mar- 
riage of  Charles  I.  to,  13. 

Marlborough,  John  Churchill,  Duke  of, 
his  intrigues  with  James  II.,  106 ; 
commands  army  in  the  Netherlands, 
119, 120;  wins  battle  of  Blenheim,  121 ; 
of  Ramillies,  121;  of  Oudenarde,  122; 
of  Malplaquet,  124;  dismissed  from 
office,  126. 

Marlborough,  Sarah,  Duchess  of,  her 
ascendancy  over  Queen  Anne,  109, 
120;  dismissed,  126. 

Marston  Moor,  battle  of,  50. 

Mary,  Queen  of  Scots,  7. 

Mary,  daughter  of  Charles  I.,  74. 

Mary,  daughter  of  James  II.,  married 
to  William  III.,  80;  excluded  from 
throne  by  Exclusion  Bill,  84;  declared 
Queen  by  the  Tories,  97;  death,  108. 

Mary  of  Modena,  82. 

Masham,  Mrs.,  her  influence  over 
Queen  Anne,  125. 

Matthias,  Emperor,  15. 

Maurice,  Prince,  46,  48. 

MtiyJJower,  voyage  of  the,  26. 

Methuen  Treaty,  the,  122. 

Militia,  the  question  of  the  control  of, 
37;  demanded  by  parliament,  38;  or- 
dinance for  regulating.  38,  39;  declared 
to  be  in  royal  power,  72. 

Millenary  Petition,  9,  26. 

Model,   the  New,  51;   success  of,   53; 


INDEX. 


133 


becomes  a  political  power,  56,  57,  58; 

remonstrance  of,   59  ;    quarrels   with 

parliament,  63,  67,  68;  disbanded,  72. 
Monk,  George,  restores  Charles  II.,  68. 
Monmouth,  James,  Duke  of,  proposed 

as  successor  to  Charles  II.,  83,  85; 

banished,  87  ;  rebels  against  J  ames  II., 

oo;  executed,  90. 
Monopolies,  17,  28. 
Montro.se,  Marquis  of,  opposes  Argyle, 

36:  fights  for  Charles  I.,  50,  52,  53; 

defeated,  54:  executed,  62. 
Mutiny  Act,  the,  113. 

Namur,  capture  of  by  the  French,  107; 

retaken  by  William  III.,  109. 
Nantes,  EJdict  of,  revoked,  92. 
Naseby,  battle  of,  53. 
Navigation  Act,  62. 
Netherlands,    n  ;    Dutch,   their   truce 

with  Spain,  n;  Spanish,  coveted  by 

Louis  XIV.,  75,  76. 
Newark,  44,  54. 
Newburn,  battle  of,  31. 
Newbury,  first   battle  of,   46  ;    second 

battle  of,  51. 
Newcastle,  Scots  retire  to,  54;  proposi- 

tion of,  55. 
Newcastle,  Marquis  of,  43;  victories  of, 

44;  danger  of,  49;  defeat  of,  50. 
Newmarket,  56. 
Newport,  Treaty  of,  58. 
Nimwegen,  Peace  of,  81 
Non-jurors,  the,  102. 


,  Titus,  his  perjuries,  81. 
Occasional  Conformity,  bill  against,  126. 
Orange,  William,   Prince  of,  father  of 

William  III.,  74. 
Orange,  William,  Prince  of.     See  Wil- 

liam III. 
Ordinance,  militia,  38,  39;  self-denying, 

5i- 

Ormond,  Duke  of,  61. 
Osborne,  Sir  Thomas.     See  Danby. 
Oudenarde,  battle  of,  122. 
Overbury,  Sir  Thomas,  murdered,  14. 
Oxford,  head-quarters  of  Charles  I.,  43; 

treaty  of,  45;  surrender  of,  54;  parlia- 

ment held  at,  85. 

Palatinate,  loss  of,  17. 

Parliament,  power  of,  in  Tudor  times, 

6;  quarrels  with  James  I.,  8,  10;  in- 

tolerance of,  9. 

—  the  Addled,  13  ;  the  Short,  30;  the 
Mongrel,  48;  Barebones",  64. 

—  the  Long,   meets,  32  ;    work  of,  34  ; 
disunion  in,  35,  36  ;  Puritan  tendency 
of,  35  ;    becomes  revolutionary,   36  ; 
demands  militia,  38  ;   quarrels   with 
Army,    56  ;    claims    sole    legislative 
power,  59  ;  dissolves  itself,  69. 


Parliament  under  Cromwell,  packed,  66; 
refuses  to  accept  a  written  constitu- 
tion, 67. 

—  the  "Cavalier",    71;   its  work,  72; 
persecutes   Dissenters,    73  ;    opposes 
Charles  II.,  77,  78;  unpopularity  of, 
79,  81  ;  dissolution  of,  81. 

—  under  James  II.,  90. 

Parties,  origin  of  English  political,  84. 

Partition  Treaties,  the,  112,  113. 

Penal  Laws,  origin  of,  8 ;  question  of, 
14,  18,  19,  77,  89,  94. 

Penn,  William,  94. 

Penruddock,  rebellion  of,  65. 

Pensionary,  Grand,  74. 

Perpetuation  Bill,  63. 

Perth,  Assembly  at,  15  ;  Five  Articles 
of,  15,  29. 

Petition  and  Advice,  the,  66. 

Petition  of  the  Seven  Bishops,  95. 

"Petitioners",  the,  84. 

Petre,  Father,  91. 

Philip  III.  of  Spain,  n,  13. 

Philip  IV.  of  Spain,  66. 

Philip  of  Anjou,  King  of  Spain,  113. 

Philiphaugh,  battle  of,  54. 

Pilgrim  Fathers,  the,  26,  74. 

Plague,  the  Great,  75. 

Plot,  Gunpowder,  9;  Popish,  81 ;  Rye 
House,  86. 

Portsmouth,  38;  surrendered,  42. 

Powick  Bridge,  battle  of,  42. 

Prague,  battle  of,  16. 

Presbyterians,  7  ;  organization  of,  29 ; 
have  majority  in  Parliament,  55:  offer 
terms  to  Charles  at  Newport,  58:  ex- 
pelled from  Parliament  by  Pride,  59; 
opposed  to  Cromwell,  66;  restored  to 
Parliament  by  Monk,  68;  persecution 
of,  73,  89. 

Preston,  battle  of,  58. 

Pretender,  the,  son  of  James  II.,  95,96; 
acknowledged  King  of  England  by 
Louis  XIV.,  115. 

Pride,  Colonel,  purges  Parliament,  59. 

Propositions,  the  Ten,  34;  the  Nineteen, 
39 ;  of  Newcastle,  55. 

Protector,  Cromwell  becomes,  64. 

Prynne,  Puritan  writer,  27,  32. 

Purge,  Pride's,  59. 

Puritans,  2  ;  origin  of,  3 ;  persecution 
of,  3;  spirit  of,  5;  political  importance 
of,  5,  40;  demands  of,  9,  23;  division 
among,  48,  52. 

Pym,  John,  24,  30,  34,  37,  38,  48. 

Pyrenees,  Treaty  of,  75. 

Raleigh,  Sir  Walter,  2,  14. 
Ramillies,  battle  of,  121. 
Rebellion,  the  Great,  results  of,  70. 
Recusancy,  8. 

Reform  of  Constituencies  during  Com- 
monwealth, 65. 


134 


INDEX. 


Reformation,  the,  effect  of,  in  England, 

2.  3- 

Regicides,  punishment  of,  72. 
Remonstrance,  the  Grand,  37. 

—  of  the  Army,  59. 
Republican  party,  64,  66,  67. 
Restoration,  causes  of  the,  69,  70. 
Revolution  of  1688,  90,  98. 
Rhe,  Expedition  to,  22. 

Right,  Declaration  of,  98. 

—  Petition  of,  23,  27. 
Rights,  Bill  of,  98. 
Ripon,  Treaty  of,  31. 
Rochelle,  22. 

Rochester,   Lawrence   Hyde,   Earl  of, 

86,  91 ;  dismissed,  93. 
Roman  Catholics,  2 ;   persecuted,  3,  8, 

9,  81,  89,  Charles  II.  leans  towards, 

77,  80;  James  II.  assists,  89,  94. 
Root  and  Branch  party,  35. 
Rowton  Heath,  battle  of,  54. 
Rump,  the,    Parliament  restored,  68 ; 

expelled,  68. 
Russell,   Admiral,   wins  battle  of   La 

Hogue,  106;  his  intrigues  with  James 

II.,  106. 
Russell,  Lord  William,  leads  Exclusion 

party,  82  ;  executed,  87. 
Russell,  Edward,  96. 
Rye  House  Plot,  86. 
Ryswick,  Treaty  of,  no. 

Sacheyerell,  his  sermons  against  the 
Whigs,  125. 

St.  John,  Henry.     See  Bolingbroke. 

St.  John,  Oliver,  prosecution  of,  13. 

St.  Thome"  burned  by  Raleigh's  expe- 
dition, 14. 

Saints,  the,  64 ;  Cromwell  relies  on 
them,  64. 

Sancroft,  Archbishop,  95 ;  forfeits  the 
archbishopric  as  a  non-juror,  102. 

Sarmiento.     See  Gondomar. 

Savoy,  Duke  of,  persecutes  Protes- 
tants, 66. 

Savoy  Palace,  Conference  at,  73. 

Schomberg,  Marshal,  sent  by  William 
III.  to  subdue  rebellion  in  Ireland, 
103. 

Scotland,  Union  with  England  pro- 
posed, 8 ;  rebellion  of,  against  Charles 
I.,  28;  fights  for  Parliament,  48;  army 
of,  presents  propositions  to  Charles  I., 
55  ;  makes  engagement  with  Charles 
I. ,  57  ;  invades  England,  58 ;  rises 
against  the  Commonwealth,  61 ;  forces 
of,  beaten  at  Dunbar,  62 ;  and  at 
Worcester,  62;  Jacobite  rising  in,  104; 
union  with  England,  122. 

Scots  anxious  to  convert  England,  48, 
49;  make  terms  with  Charles,  54. 

Security,  Act  of,  123. 

Sedgmour,  battle  of,  90. 


Selden,  John,  52. 

Settlement,  Act  of,  114. 

Shaftesbury,  Anthony  Ashley  Cooper, 
Earl  of,  76;  member  of  "Cabal":  ad- 
vises the  Declaration  of  Indulgence, 

77  ;  made  Chancejlor,  77  ;  dismissed, 

78  ;  joins  opposition,  78,  82,  83  ;   his 
exclusion  scheme,  84  ;  tried  for  trea- 
son, 86;  flies  to  Holland  and  dies,  86. 

Ship-money,  25,  27,  34. 

Shrewsbury,  minister  of  William  III., 
103;  lord-treasurer  in  1714,  128. 

Somers,  John,  Lord,  his  defence  of  the 
seven  bishops,  95. 

Somerset,  Robert  Carr,  Earl  of,  12,  14. 

Sophia,  Electress  of  Hanover,  heiress 
to  the  throne  of  England,  1*4;  death 
of,  127. 

Sovereign  power,  4;  question  of,  raised, 
5,  59;  true  solution  of,  6;  real  ques- 
tion in  the  Civil  war,  40 ;  unsolved. 
69;  parties  divided  as  to,  84;  solution 
reached  in  1688,  98. 

Spain,  James  I.  makes  peace  with,  n  ; 
objects  of,  12 ;  war  with,  21  ;  peace 
with,  24;  campaigns  in,  121,  122. 

Spanish  Succession,  Problem  of,  no; 
war  of,  119-126. 

Spice  Islands,  the,  14,  73. 

Stamford,  Lord,  Parliamentary  general, 

Star  Chamber,  13,  26,  27;  abolished,  34. 

Steenkerke,  battle  of,  106. 

Stewart  house,  genealogy  of,  in. 

Strafford,  Thomas  Wentwprth,  Earl  of, 
joins  Charles  I.,  21  ;  his  policy,  21  ; 
in  Ireland.  25 ;  his  advice  about  the 
Scottish  rebellion,  29 ;  his  speech  in 
Privy  Council,  30,  32;  impeached,  32: 
condemned  by  attainder,  33 ;  exe- 
cuted, 34. 

Strasbourg  seized  by  Louis  XIV.,  86. 

Stratton,  battle  of,  45. 

Strode,  William,  38. 

Sunderland,  Earl  of,  adviser  of  Charles 
II.,  86. 

Sweden  joins  Triple  Alliance,  76. 

Swift,  Dean,  his  Tory  pamphlets,  126. 

Sydney,  Algernon,  executed,  87. 

Tadcaster,  battle  of,  44. 

Taunton,    relief  of,   52 ;    crowning   of 

Monmouth  at,  90. 
Taxation,  arbitrary,  10,  13,  21,  24,  27, 

34.  65. 

Temple,  Sir  William,  82. 
Test  Act,  78,  91,  92. 
Tests,  89;  suspended,  94. 
Tippermuir,  battle  of,  50. 
Toleration,  6,  70,  77,  78,  79,  80,  84,  89, 

oo,  93,  97. 

Toleration  Act,  the,  102. 
Torbay,  landing  of  William  III.  at,  96. 


INDEX. 


135 


Tories,  origin  of,  84 ;  victory  of  in 
Charles  II. 's  time,  85,  86;  their  diffi- 
culties at  the  Revolution,  97  ;  policy 
of,  under  William  III.,  too,  107;  un- 
der Anne,  117. 

Treason,  law  of,  33,  87. 

Triennial  Act  of  1641,  80. 

Triennial  Bill  of  1693  vetoed  by  Wiliiam 
III.,  107  ;  passed,  108. 

Triers,  Board  of,  appointed  by  Crom- 
well, 65. 

Tromp,  Admiral  Van,  63. 

Tunnage  and  Poundage,  21,  24. 

Turnham  Green,  Charles  I.  at,  43. 

Tyrconnel,  Earl  of,  adviser  of  James 
II.,  91  ;  rules  in  Ireland,  93. 

Ulster,  Colonization  of,  n. 

Uniformity,  Act  of,  73. 

Union,  the,  of  England  and  Scotland, 

8,  122,  124. 

Utrecht,  Treaty  of,  126. 
Uxbridge,  Treaty  of,  52. 

Vane,  Sir  Harry,  33;  executed,  73. 
Verney,  Sir  Edmund,  death  of,  42. 
Villars,  Marshal,  defeated  at  Mal- 

plaquet,  124. 

Villiers.     See  Buckingham. 
Virginia,  Colony  of,  74. 


Waller,  Sir  William,  45,  48,  49,  50. 
Wallingford  House  party,  67. 
War,  The  Bishops',  31. 

—  The  Great  Civil,  cause  of,  40;  nature 
of,  41. 

—  The  Second  Civil,  57,  58. 

—  The  Thirty  Years',  15,  16,  17,  25. 
Wentworth,  Sir  Thos.   See  Strafford. 
Wexford,  storm  of,  61. 

Whigs,  origin  of,  84,  85,  86;  ruin  of,  by 
Shaftesbury,  86  ;  restored  by  James 
II.'s  conduct,  88;  victory  of,  in  1689, 
97;  their  policy  under  William  III., 
loo,  102,  107;  their  successes,  108-1:0; 
their  policy  under  Anne,  117. 

William  III.  kept  from  his  office  in 
Holland,  74 ;  restored  to  it,  80;  mar- 
riage, 80;  opposes  Louis  XIV.,  88; 
invited  to  England,  96;  his  difficulties, 
96 ;  lands  at  Torbay,  96 ;  is  made 
king,  98  ;  his  policy,  99  ;  subdues  re- 
bellion in  Ireland,  103 ;  war  with 
France,  101,  106,  107,  109  ;  makes 
Peace  of  Ryswick,  112  ;  partition 
treaties,  112,  113;  death,  115;  triumph 
of  his  policy,  115. 

Winceby,  battle  of,  47. 

Witt,  de,  74,  75  ;  murdered,  80. 

York,  attack  upon  Newcastle  at,  49. 
York,  James,  Duke  of.   See  "James  II. 


' '  The  volumes  contain  the  ripe  results  of  the  studies  of  men  wht 
are  authorities  in  their  respective  fields." — THE  NATION. 

EPOCHS  OF  HISTORY 


EPOCHS  OF 
ANCIENT    HISTORY 

Eleven  volumes,   i6mo, 
each  $1.00. 


EPOCHS  OF 
MODERN    HISTORY 

Eighteen  volumes,  i6mo, 
each  $1.00. 


The  Epoch  volumes  have  most  successfully  borne  the  test  of 
experience,  and  are  universally  acknowledged  to  be  the  best  series 
of  historical  manuals  in  existence.  They  are  admirably  adapted  in 
form  and  matter  to  the  needs  of  colleges,  schools,  reading  circles, 
and  private  classes.  Attention  is  called  to  them  as  giving  the 
utmost  satisfaction  as  class  hand-books. 


NOAH  PORTER,  President  of  Yale  College. 
"The  '  Epochs  of  History'  have  been  prepared  with  knowl- 
edge and  artistic  skill  to  meet  the  wants  of  a  large  number  of 
readers.  To  the  young  they  furnish  an  outline  or  compendium. 
To  those  who  are  older  they  present  a  convenient  sketch  of  the 
heads  of  the  knowledge  which  they  have  already  acquired.  The 
outlines  are  by  no  means  destitute  of  spirit,  and  may  be  used  with 
great  profit  for  farnily  reading,  and  in  select  classes  or  reading  clubs." 

CHARLES  KENDALL  ADAMS,  President  of  Cornell  University. 

"A  series  of  concise  and  carefully  prepared  volumes  on  special 
eras  of  history.  Each  is  also  complete  in  itself,  and  has  no  especial 
connection  with  the  other  members  of  the  series.  The  works  are 
all  written  by  authors  selected  by  the  editor  on  account  of  some 
especial  qualifications  for  a  portrayal  of  the  period  they  respectively 
describe.  The  volumes  form  an  excellent  collection,  especially 
adapted  to  the  wants  of  a  general  reader." 

The  Publishers  -will  supply  these  volumes  to  teachers  at  SPECIAL 

NE  T  RA  TES,  and  would  solicit  correspondence  concerning 

terms  for  examination  and  introduction  copies. 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S   SONS,    Publishers 

153-157  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York. 


is  the  best  proof  of  its  general  popularity,  and  the  excellence  of 
the  various  volumes  is  further  attested  by  their  having  been 
adopted  as  text-books  in  many  of  our  leading  educational  institu- 
tions. The  publishers  beg  to  call  attention  to  the  following  list 
comprising  some  of  the  most  prominent  institutions  using  volumes 
of  the  series : 


Smith  College,  Northampton,  Mass. 
Univ.  of  Vermont,  Burlington,  Vt. 
Yale  Univ.,  New  Haven,  Conn. 
Harvard  Univ.,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Bellewood  Sem.,  Anchorage,  Ky. 
Vanderbilt  Univ.,  Nashville,  Tenn. 
State  Univ.,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 
Christian  Coll.,  Columbia,  Mo. 
Adelphi  Acad.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Earlham  Coll.,  Richmond,  Ind. 
Granger  Place  School,  Canandaigua, 

N.  Y. 

Salt  Lake  Acad., Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 
Beloit  Col.,  Beloit,  Wis. 
Logan  Female  Coll.,  Russellville,  Ky. 
No.  West  Univ.,  Evanston,  111. 
State  Normal  School,  Baltimore,  Md. 
Hamilton  Coll.,  Clinton,  N.  Y. 
Doane  Coll.,  Crete,  Neb. 
Princeton  College,  Princeton,  N.  J. 
Williams  Coll.,  Williamstown,  Mass. 
Cornell  Univ.,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Illinois  Coll.,  Jacksonville,  111. 


Univ.  of  South,  Sewaunee,  Tenn. 
Wesleyan  Univ.,  Mt.  Pleasant,  la. 
Univ.  of  Cal.,  Berkeley,  Cal. 
So.  Car.  Coll.,  Columbia,  S.  C. 
Amsterdam      Acad.,       Amsterdam, 

N.  Y. 

Carleton  Coll.,  Northfield,  Minn. 
Wesleyan  Univ.,  Middletown,  Mass. 
Albion  Coll.,  Albion,  Mich. 
Dartmouth  Coll.,  Hanover,  N.  H. 
Wilmington  Coll.,  Wilmington,  O. 
Madison  Univ.,  Hamilton,  N.  Y. 
Syracuse  Univ.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Univ.  of  Wis.,  Madison,  Wis. 
Union  Coll.,Schenectady,  N.  Y. 
Norwich  Free  Acad.,  Norwich,  Conn. 
Greenwich  Acad.,  Greenwich,  Conn. 
Univ.  of  Neb.,  Lincoln,  Neb. 
Kalamazoo  Coll.,  Kalamazoo,  Mich. 
Olivet  Coll.,  Olivet,  Mich. 
Amherst  Coll.,  Amherst,  Mass. 
Ohio  State  Univ.,  Columbus,  O. 
Free  Schools,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 


Bishop  J.  F.  HURST,  ex- President  of  Drew  Theol.  Sem. 
"  It  appears  to  me  that  the  idea  of  Morris  in  his  Epochs  is 
strictly  in  harmony  with  the  philosophy  of  history — namely,  that 
great  movements  should  be  treated  not  according  to  narrow 
geographical  and  national  limits  and  distinction,  but  universally, 
according  to  their  place  in  the  general  life  of  the  world.  The 
historical  Maps  and  the  copious  Indices  are  welcome  additions 
to  the  volumes." 


EPOCHS     OF    MODERN 
HISTORY. 

A   SERIES    OF   BOOKS  NARRATING    THE   HISTORY   OF 

ENGLAND  AND  EUROPE  AT  SUCCESSIVE  EPOCHS 

SUBSEQUENT  TO  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA. 

Edited  by 

EDWARD  E.  MORRIS. 

Eighteen  volumes,  i6mo,  with  74  Maps,  Plans,  and  Tables. 

Sold  separately.     Price  per  vol.,  $1.00. 
The  Set,  Roxburgh  style,  gilt  top,  in  box,  $18.00. 


THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  MIDDLE  AGES- 
England  and  Europe  in  the  Ninth  Century. 
By  the  Very  Rev.  R.  W.  CHURCH,  M.A. 

"A  remarkably  thoughtful  and  satisfactory  discussion  of 
the  causes  and  results  of  the  vast  changes  which  came  upon 
Europe  during-  the  period  discussed.  The  book  is  adapted  to 
be  exceedingly  serviceable." — Chicago  Standard. 

"At  once  readable  and  valuable.  It  is  comprehensive  and 
yet  gives  the  details  of  a  period  most  interesting  to  the  student 
of  history. " — Herald  and  Presbyter. 

"It  is  written  with  a  clearness  and  vividness  of  statement 
which  make  it  the  pleasantest  reading.  It  represents  a  great 
deal  of  patient  research,  and  is  careful  and  scholarly." — • 
Boston  Journal. 

THE  NORMANS  IN  EUROPE— The  Feudal 
System  and  England  under  the  Norman 
Kings.  By  Rev.  A.  H.  JOHNSON,  M.A. 

"  Its  pictures  of  the  Normans  in  their  home,  of  the  Scan- 
dinavian exodus,  the  conquest  of  England,  and  Norman 
administration,  are  full  of  vigor  and  cannot  fail  of  holding  the 
reader's  attention." — Episcopal  Register. 

"  The  style  of  the  author  is  vigorous  and  animated,  and  he 
has  given  a  valuable  sketch  of  the  origin  and  progress  of  the 
great  Northein  movement  that  has  shaped  the  history  of 
modern  Europe." — Boston  Transcript. 


EPOCHS  OF  MODERN  HISTORY 


THE   CRUSADES.     By  Rev.  G.  W.  Cox. 

"  To  be  warmly  commended  for  important  qualities.  The 
author  shows  conscientious  fidelity  to  the  materials,  and  such 
skill  in  the  use  of  them,  that,  as  a  result,  the  reader  has 
before  him  a  narrative  related  in  a  style  that  makes  it  truly 
fascinating." — CongregationaZist. 

"  It  is  written  in  a  pure  and  flowing  style,  and  its  arrange- 
ment and  treatment  of  subject  are  exceptional." — Christian 
Intelligencer. 

THE  EARLY  PL  A  N  T  AGEN  ETS— Their 
Relation  to  the  History  of  Europe;  The 
Foundation  and  Growth  of  Constitutional 
Government,  By  Rev.  W.  STUBBS,  M.A. 

"Nothing  could  be  desired  more  clear,  succinct,  and  well 
arranged.  All  parts  of  the  book  are  well  done.  It  may  be 
pronounced  the  best  existing  brief  history  of  the  constitution 
for  this,  its  most  important  period." — The  Nation. 

"  Prof.  Stubbs  has  presented  leading  events  with  such  fair- 
ness and  wisdom  as  are  seldom  found.  He  is  remarkably 
clear  and  satisfactory." — The  Churchman, 

EDWARD    111.     By  Rev.  W.  WARBURTON,  M.A. 

"  The  author  has  done  his  work  well,  and  we  commend  it 
as  containing  in  small  space  all  essential  matter." — New  York 
Independent. 

"  Events  and  movements  are  admirably  condensed  by  the 
author,  and  presented  in  such  attractive  form  as  to  entertain 
as  well  as  instruct." — Chicago  Interior. 

THE  HOUSES  OF  LANCASTER  AND  YORK 
—The  Conquest  and  Loss  of  France.  By 

JAMES  GAIRDNER. 

"Prepared  in  a  most  careful  and  thorough  manner,  and 
ought  to  be  read  by  every  student." — New  York  Times. 

"It  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired  as  regards  compactness, 
accuracy,  and  excellence  of  literary  execution.  "~Boston 
Journal. 


EPOCHS  OF  MODERN  HISTORY 

THE    ERA    OF   THE    PROTESTANT    REVO- 
LUTION.      By   FREDERIC   SEEBOHM.     With  Notes,  on 
Books   in    English   relating   to    the    Reformation,    by    Prof. 
GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D. 

"For  an  impartial  record  of  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
changes  about  four  hundred  years  ago,  we  cannot  commend  a 
better  manual." — Sunday-School  Times. 

"All  that  could  be  desired,  as  well  in  execution  as  in  plan. 
The  narrative  is  animated,  and  the  selection  and  grouping  of 
events  skillful  and  effective." — The  Nation. 

THE  EARLY  TUDORS— Henry  VII.,  Henry 
V11I.  By  Rev.  C.  E.  MOBERLEY,  M.A.,  late  Master  in 
Rugby  School. 

"Is  concise,  scholarly,  and  accurate.  On  the  epoch  of  which 
it  treats,  we  know  of  no  work  which  equals  it." — JV.  Y.  Observer. 

"  A  marvel  of  clear  and  succinct  brevity  and  good  historical 
judgment.  There  is  hardly  a  better  book  of  its  kind  to  be 
named." — New  York  Independent. 

THE  AGE  OF  ELIZABETH.  By  Rev.  M. 
CREIGHTON,  M.A. 

"Clear  and  compact  in  style  ;  careful  in  their  facts,  and 
just  in  interpretation  of  them.  It  sheds  much  light  on  the 
progress  of  the  Reformation  and  the  origin  of  the  Popish 
reaction  during  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign  ;  also,  the  relation  of 
Jesuitism  to  the  latter." — Presbyterian  Review. 

"  A  clear,  concise,  and  just  story  of  an  era  crowded  with 
events  of  interest  and  importance. "— A^w  Yc~£  World. 

THE    THIRTY    YEARS'     WAR— I  61S-!  648 

By  SAMUEL  RAWSON  GARDINER. 

"  As  a  manual  it  will  prove  of  the  greates'  practical  value, 
while  to  the  general  reader  it  will  afford  a  clear  and  interesting 
account  of  events.  We  know  of  no  more  spirited  and  attractive 
recital  of  the  great  era." — Boston  Saturday  Evening  Gazette. 

"  The  thrilling  story  of  those  times  has  never  been  told  so 
vividly  or  succinctly  as  in  this  volume." — Episcopal  Register. 


EPOCHS  OF  MODERX  HISTORY. 


THE  PURITAN  REVOLUTION ;  and  the  First 
Two  Stuarts,  1  6O3-  1  66O.  By  SAMUEL  RAWSON 
GARDINER. 

"  The  narrative  is  condensed  and  brief,  yet  sufficiently  com- 
prehensive to  give  an  adequate  view  of  the  events  related." 
— Chicago  Standard. 

"  Mr.  Gardiner  uses  his  researches  in  an  admirably  clear 
and  fair  way  " — Congregaiionalist. 

"  The  _-ketcn;o  concise,  but  clear  and  perfectly  intelligible." 
—Hartford  Courant. 

THE  ENGLISH  RESTORATION  AND  LOUIS 
XIV.,  from  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  to  the 
Peace  of  Nimwegen.  By  OSMUND  AIRY,  M. A. 

"  It  is  crisply  and  admirably  written.  An  immense  amount 
of  information  is  conveyed  and  with  great  clearness,  the 
arrangement  of  the  subjects  showing  great  skill  and  a  thor- 
ough command  of  the  complicated  theme." — Boston  Saturday 
Evening  Gazette. 

"The  author  writes  with  fairness  and  discrimination,  and 
has  given  a  clear  and  intelligible  presentation  of  the  time." — 
New  York  Evangelist. 

THE  FALL  OF  THE  STUARTS;  and  Western 
Europe.  By  Rev.  EDWARD  HALE,  M.A. 

"  A  valuable  compend  to  the  general  reader  and  scholar." 
— Providence  Journal. 

"It  will  be  found  of  great  value.     It  is  a  very  graphic 
account  of  the  history  of  Europe  during  the  I7th  century, 
and  is  admirably  adapted  for  the  use  of  students." — Boston 
Saturday  Evening  Gazette. 
"An  admirable  handbook  for  the  student. " —  TheChurchman. 

THE  AGE  OF  ANNE.     By  EDWARD  E.  MORRIS,  M.A. 

"  The  author's  arrangement  of  the  material  is  remarkably 
clear,  his  selection  and  adjustment  of  the  facts  judicious,  his 
historical  judgment  fair  and  candid,  while  the  style  wins  by 
its  simple  elegance." — Chicago  Standard. 

"An  excellent  compendium  of  the  history  of  an  important 
period." — The  Watchman. 


EPOCHS  OF  MODERN  HISTORY. 

^ 

THE  EARLY  HANOVERIANS— Europe  from 
the  Peace  of  Utrecht  to  the  Peace  of  Aix- 
la-Chapelle.  By  EDWARD  E.  MORRIS,  M.A. 

"  Masterly,  condensed,  and  vigorous,  this  is  one  of  the 
books  which  it  is  a  delight  to  read  at  odd  moments  ;  which 
are  broad  and  suggestive,  and  at  the  same  time  condensed  in 
treatment." — Christian  Advocate. 

"  A  remarkably  clear  and  readable  summary  of  the  salient 
points  of  interest.  The  maps  and  tables,  no  less  than  the 
author's  style  and  treatment  of  the  subject,  entitle  the  volume 
to  the  highest  claims  of  recognition." — Boston  Daily  Ad- 
vertiser. 

FREDERICK  THE  GREAT,  AND  THE  SEVEN 
YEARS'  WAR.  By  F.  W.  LONGMAN. 

"  The  subject  is  most  important,  and  the  author  has  treated 
it  in  a  way  which  is  both  scholarly  and  entertaining." — The 
Churchman. 

' '  Admirably  adapted  to  interest  school  boys,  and  older 
heads  will  find  it  pleasant  reading." — New  York  Tribune. 

THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION,  AND  FIRST 
EMPIRE.  By  WILLIAM  O'CONNOR  MORRIS.  With 
Appendix  by  ANDREW  D.  WHITE,  LL.D. ,  ex-President  of 
Cornell  University. 

"  We  have  long  needed  a  simple  compendium  of  this  period, 
and  we  have  here  one  which  is  brief  enough  to  be  easily  run 
through  with,  and  yet  particular  enough  to  make  entertaining 
reading." — New  York  Evening  Post. 

"  The  author  has  well  accomplished  his  difficult  task  of 
sketching  in  miniature  the  grand  and  crowded  drama  of  the 
French  Revolution  and  the  Napoleonic  Empire,  showing 
himself  to  be  no  servile  compiler,  but  capable  of  judicious 
and  independent  criticism." — Spring  field  Republican. 

THE  EPOCH  OF   REFORM— 1  83O- 1  85O.    By 

JUSTIN  MCCARTHY. 

'.'  Mr.  McCarthy  knows  the  period  of  which  he  writes 
thoroughly,  and  the  result  is  a  narrative  that  is  at  once  enter- 
taining and  trustworthy." — New  York  Examiner 

"  The  narrative  is  clear  and  comprehensive,  and  told  with 
abundant  knowledge  and  grasp  of  the  subject." — Boston 
Courier. 


IMPORTANT  HISTORICAL 
WORKS. 

CIVILIZATION  DURING  THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 
Especially  in  its  Relation  to  Modern  Civil- 
ization. By  GEORGE  B.  ADAMS,  Professor  of  History  in 
Yale  University.  8vo,  $2.50. 

Professor  Adams  has  here  supplied  the  need  of  a  text-book 
for  the  study  of  Mediaeval  History  in  college  classes  at  once 
thorough  and  yet  capable  of  being  handled  in  the  time  usually 
allowed  to  it.  He  has  aimed  to  treat  the  subject  in  a  manner 
which  its  place  in  the  college  curriculum  demands,  by  present- 
ing as  clear  a  view  as  possible  of  the  underlying  and  organic 
growth  of  our  civilization,  how  its  foundations  were  laid  and  its 
chief  elements  introduced. 

Prof.  KENDRIC  C.  BABCOCK,  University  of  Minnesota  : — "It 
is  one  of  the  best  books  of  the  kind  which  I  have  seen.  We 
shall  use  it  the  coming  term." 

Prof.  MARSHALL  S.  BROWN,  Michigan  University: — "I 
regard  the  work  as  a  very  valuable  treatment  of  the  great 
movements  of  history  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  as  one 
destined  to  be  extremely  helpful  to  young  students. ' ' 

BOSTON  HERALD: — "Professor  Adams  admirably  presents 
the  leading  features  of  a  thousand  years  of  social,  political, 
and  religious  development  in  the  history  of  the  world.  It  is 
valuable  from  beginning  to  end." 

HISTORY   OF  THE   UNITED  STATES.     By  E. 

BENJAMIN    ANDREWS,    D.D.,  LL.D.,    President    of    Brown 
University.     With  maps.     Two  vols. ,  crown  octavo,  $4.00. 

BOSTON  ADVERTISER  : — "  We  doubt  if  there  has  been  so 
complete,  graphic,  and  so  thoroughly  impartial  a  history  of  our 
country  condensed  into  the  same  space.  It  must  become  a 
standard." 

ADVANCE: — "One  of  the  best  popular,  general  histories  of 
America,  if  not  the  best." 

HERALD  AND  PRESBYTER: — "The  very  history  that  many 
people  have  been  looking  for.  It  does  not  consist  simply  of 
minute  statements,  but  treats  of  causes  and  effects  with  philo- 
sophical grasp  and  thoughtfulness.  It  is  the  work  of  a  scholar 
and  thinker." 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  AT  LOS  ANGELES 
THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 


FEB  1  1937 


\ 


Form  L-9-15?/i-7,'35 


m  281959 

MAR  17  1952 


REC'D  DWJ 
10  1952*    ^ 


1  5  1954 

2  0  1954 


JAN     2  195 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000802102     4 


g: 


I 


PLEAclu  DO   NOT    REMOVE 
THIS    BOOK  CARD 


University  Research  Library 


T 


Ul 


UJ 


